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

Rangers Need Gomez To Be Much Better

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-23-2008, 11:55 AM
  #26
DontStepanMe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Queens, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 5,383
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
if you trade Gomez, who becomes this team's #1 center? It certainly shouldn't be Drury. What Dubi is we still don't know, but for most of the season, he's been looking like a third liner. Anisimov is not a top line centerman. I don't think trading Gomez is an option for this team. Getting him a good, young winger perhaps is an option though, but from where and the cost.
that is a problem. But i would let Dubi take the #1 or Drury. It wouldn't really make a difference b/c by trading gomez you are forfeiting this year anyway. Which I think we should do anyway b/c I don't see us doing any damage in the PO's. Heck if we lose alot it won't matter b/c we would get a better pick in what is supposed to be a fanatastic year for FORWARDS, which we sorely lack. again by trading Gomez we concede this year and next w/ the hope that in 2-3 years our young players all start hitting their primes together, have chemistry from playing together, and rise together. The extra picks and prospects from trading gomez would help speed the process, and give us more talent to choose from. Also it will alleviate our cap situation and ensure us the necessary cap room to re-sign Dubi, Zherdev, Girardi, Staal, Cally, Korps etc in the next couple years. Especially if the cap goes down.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
Maybe we should realize that this team's not going to be a Stanley Cup favorite for a while. That it will keep changing the parts and likely won't improve dramatically in the near future. The hope would be to keep icing a competitive team that could get hot at the right time and run a hot goalie into and through the playoffs. There doesn't seem to be a real potential for getting guys like Crosby, Malkin, Datsyuk, Pronger, or any of the names. Getting one would inevitably create a hole elsewhere and the way of getting those guys these days is through the draft (and perhaps the Rangers have done that with Lundvqist). So perhaps we have to live with that and hope for the best...

That's what I have been saying since we signed Gomez and Drury. We are not going to do squat while we have those albatross contracts on the books. and now we added Redden. We will never be bad enough to get an uber high pick (top 5) but we will never be good enough to win a cup. So we will be mired in mediocrity, unless we get some really lucky late picks. We will become the St. Lous blues. Good enough to make the PO's for 26 years straight (i think) but not win one cup.

DontStepanMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2008, 12:02 PM
  #27
NYR Sting
Heart and Soul
 
NYR Sting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
What I like about this team is there really is no "Man". I'll exclude Lundqvist because every team depends on their goalie.

I like that this team does not look to one player to carry the load offensively. I like the fact that they are getting scoring from three lines.
That might be why we're 27th out of 30 in goal scoring.

NYR Sting is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2008, 12:10 PM
  #28
NYR Sting
Heart and Soul
 
NYR Sting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
if you trade Gomez, who becomes this team's #1 center? It certainly shouldn't be Drury. What Dubi is we still don't know, but for most of the season, he's been looking like a third liner. Anisimov is not a top line centerman. I don't think trading Gomez is an option for this team. Getting him a good, young winger perhaps is an option though, but from where and the cost.

Maybe we should realize that this team's not going to be a Stanley Cup favorite for a while. That it will keep changing the parts and likely won't improve dramatically in the near future. The hope would be to keep icing a competitive team that could get hot at the right time and run a hot goalie into and through the playoffs. There doesn't seem to be a real potential for getting guys like Crosby, Malkin, Datsyuk, Pronger, or any of the names. Getting one would inevitably create a hole elsewhere and the way of getting those guys these days is through the draft (and perhaps the Rangers have done that with Lundvqist). So perhaps we have to live with that and hope for the best...
But Fletch, this is exactly what people with my point of view have been saying. Why the hell would you want your team to stagnate for several years on the off chance that you can get hot in the playoffs?

You're all saying that Gomez needs a winger, blah blah blah. How exactly are you going to get him a winger when you have half the salary cap dedicated to four guys, all of whom are underperforming? You need to pay players like that, or draft them.

This is exactly why I didn't want Gomez in the first place. He ISN'T that good and he never was. I watch a lot of Devils games every season. Gomez is a second line player and he always has been. He's predictable and he's a turnover machine. You need all sorts of circumstances for him to be successful and he constantly, as a number of Devils fans have pointed out recently, needs a good kick in the ass. I'd like to think if I was paying a guy 7 million a season, he could find a way to motivate himself a little more often.

I don't see why anyone would be angry at Larry Brooks for writing this article. He IS stating nothing but the obvious.

NYR Sting is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2008, 12:14 PM
  #29
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 30,400
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sting36e View Post
That might be why we're 27th out of 30 in goal scoring.
Take a look at last season when we had a "superstar".

__________________
SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2008, 12:15 PM
  #30
Mr Bojanglez
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Mr Bojanglez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: From Jersey w/ Love
Country: United States
Posts: 10,922
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
Take a look at last season when we had a "superstar".
he did kick butt in the playoffs, though

Mr Bojanglez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2008, 12:16 PM
  #31
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 15,856
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sting36e View Post
But Fletch, this is exactly what people with my point of view have been saying. Why the hell would you want your team to stagnate for several years on the off chance that you can get hot in the playoffs?
Because, to a lot of fans, its better than the alternative which is blowing up the foundation of this team which may lead to NOT making the playoffs.

That, and its painfully obvious that pretty much all of the Rangers' forward prospects are not ready for the primetime.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2008, 12:21 PM
  #32
MikeyLikesHockey
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 603
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Because, to a lot of fans, its better than the alternative which is blowing up the foundation of this team which may lead to NOT making the playoffs.

That, and its painfully obvious that pretty much all of the Rangers' forward prospects are not ready for the primetime.
speak for yourself on that one about the prospects.

They are ready, they don't get time in the big club because of people like gomez.

We like to believe people like Staal and Girardi were ready when they came up but no it took a season of nhl play to have them as good as they are now.

Our forwards are stuck behind two centers that can't score and a coach that refuses to play young players in a more prominent role in a system that requires constant pressure , that can't be generated from high dollar FAs making tons of money and not willing to block shots and play the game that's needed to succeed.

You can't seriously believe that some players at the ahl level now can't come up and learn something playing in the bigs.

I would love to see Redden, Rosi, Gomez, Drury, and Naslund go for "conditioning stints" in the AHL and call up a bunch of kids and see if they can get the same record that our "top" players can.

MikeyLikesHockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2008, 12:22 PM
  #33
NYR Sting
Heart and Soul
 
NYR Sting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
Take a look at last season when we had a "superstar".
Assuming you meant Jagr, then I say, simply put, we didn't have a superstar last season. Jagr, and for that matter Shanahan, both looked way past their prime last season. It wasn't that surprising, either Jagr had declined a decent amount the year before from that amazing first post-lockout season.

Anyone who thinks Jagr was great last season is dreaming. Jagr was frustrating as hell last season and seemed totally ineffective for large stretches of the season. Rather than adapting his game, he seemed far more inclined to continue trying to do the things that he used to be good, despite the fact it was becoming clear that he just didn't have the speed and power to pull those kind of moves off anymore.

Which, again, is why I just don't understand the decision to sign Gomez and Drury. Banking on the fact that a couple of second liners would revitalize Jagr and Shanahan?

While I in no way support the decisions to sign Gomez, Drury or Redden, that doesn't mean that I was pining for Jagr and/or Shanahan like a lot of others. As, I've said before, I think the right move was to just let them go and get back to the never-finished rebuild.

NYR Sting is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2008, 12:23 PM
  #34
NYR Sting
Heart and Soul
 
NYR Sting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by billyH2O View Post
he did kick butt in the playoffs, though
He did, but there weren't many other points during the season when you could say the same.

NYR Sting is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2008, 12:24 PM
  #35
Brooklyndevil
82nd Airborne
 
Brooklyndevil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Brooklyn, NY USA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,627
vCash: 500
I concur with what Scott Gomez has said regarding how he usually picks up his play in the second half of a season. I don't question his abilities, but I do question if the pressure of being the man might be more than he can handle.

Brooklyndevil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2008, 12:26 PM
  #36
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 10,885
vCash: 500
Okay, and again as I said in the Sather Backer thread - Lundqvist screws up all these alternate scenarios that people are throwing out there. Think about it - how does it work if you trade Gomez and Drury (which would be tantamount to never having signed them) for future picks and replacements a step or two below?

The cap space you save is NOT going to let you sign a superstar. They don't hit the open market. Period. They get locked up for long terms at a hometown discount for the teams they play for.

The decline in play is NOT going to be enough to let you draft one of the obvious superstars (like Tavares), 'cause Lundqvist ON HIS OWN prevents you from finishing in the bottom five, maybe ten.

So, your options are:

1) Trade Lundqvist - along with everyone else that you want gone - and REALLY blow it up.

2) Or, you can take the approach that management is trying which is to build incrementally from Lundqvist out and hope to get lucky either with the right trade, a hot Hank in the POs or a later round pick who pans out like the Detroit superstars.

There is no option 3 where you get to keep Hank AND get a top five pick (unless you steal it from another team - that doesn't have a franchise goalie - in a trade).


Last edited by BrooklynRangersFan: 12-23-2008 at 12:48 PM.
BrooklynRangersFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2008, 12:27 PM
  #37
MikeyLikesHockey
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 603
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sting36e View Post
Assuming you meant Jagr, then I say, simply put, we didn't have a superstar last season. Jagr, and for that matter Shanahan, both looked way past their prime last season. It wasn't that surprising, either Jagr had declined a decent amount the year before from that amazing first post-lockout season.

Anyone who thinks Jagr was great last season is dreaming. Jagr was frustrating as hell last season and seemed totally ineffective for large stretches of the season. Rather than adapting his game, he seemed far more inclined to continue trying to do the things that he used to be good, despite the fact it was becoming clear that he just didn't have the speed and power to pull those kind of moves off anymore.

Which, again, is why I just don't understand the decision to sign Gomez and Drury. Banking on the fact that a couple of second liners would revitalize Jagr and Shanahan?

While I in no way support the decisions to sign Gomez, Drury or Redden, that doesn't mean that I was pining for Jagr and/or Shanahan like a lot of others. As, I've said before, I think the right move was to just let them go and get back to the never-finished rebuild.
Your Crazy.

Jagr started backchecking because of the system...and did what was asked. He then turned around in the playoffs and started playing JJ hockey. It pissed Renney off but since JJ was successful he had to shutup. And when given the opportunity to keep him, Renney said we were going in a different direction.....down.

MikeyLikesHockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2008, 12:33 PM
  #38
NYR Sting
Heart and Soul
 
NYR Sting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeyLikesHockey View Post
Your Crazy.

Jagr started backchecking because of the system...and did what was asked. He then turned around in the playoffs and started playing JJ hockey. It pissed Renney off but since JJ was successful he had to shutup. And when given the opportunity to keep him, Renney said we were going in a different direction.....down.
So every time he had the puck during the regular season he wasn't playing JJ hockey? What did he do, just give the puck away so he could get back to backchecking.

Don't be silly.

Jagr's skill declined from 05-06 to 06-07 and it decline again from 06-07 to 07-08. He's not a young guy anymore. Even Gretzky declined. Most players do once they hit a certain age. Listen, it's not an easy sport to play. The demands on your body are heavy, you can only keep it up for so long, especially if you're a skill player.

NYR Sting is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2008, 12:34 PM
  #39
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
Sting...

contructing a team isn't easy. And when you add the cap into the picture, it gets more difficult. I don't want to see the team "stagnate" with hopes of becoming a Stanley Cup-winning team. I want to see a team that has a chance to win the Stanley Cup each season. Unfortunately, one needs to be realistic about the makeup of this team, the prospects, the cap situations and then determine what the possibilities are. One also needs to realize that dismantling it and starting over means a couple years of growing pains, and then there would still be uncertainty as to whether or not it was done properly. Unforunately this team doesn't have real star power; the closest being Lundqivst. Unfortunately the player that's closest to being a young superstar on this team is already here (Staal) and is playing well - and there isn't a heck of a lot behind him at this moment. Unfortunately this team is up against the cap this season, and will have a tough time managing it in the next couple seasons. Everybody keeps talking about unloading contracts that are an albatross to this team - who wants an albatross unless they're getting rid of one themselves?

I will add this about Jagr, which applies to this season. At the end of the day, Jagr came through in the regular season and he came through in the playoffs. Can't imagine what this team would've done without him last season. And while he may not have looked like a superstar last season, other teams treated him as one which allowed guys like Drury and Gomez to go against second, third and fourth lines and have a heck of a lot less pressure on them. Jagr was the focus on the team and on his line. He had to deal with double-teams. He played with any winger which allowed Renney to have enormous flexibility in his lineup.

How does that relate to this season? A so-so regular season still led to a playoff series victory.

Fletch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2008, 12:36 PM
  #40
MikeyLikesHockey
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 603
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sting36e View Post
So every time he had the puck during the regular season he wasn't playing JJ hockey? What did he do, just give the puck away so he could get back to backchecking.

Don't be silly.

Jagr's skill declined from 05-06 to 06-07 and it decline again from 06-07 to 07-08. He's not a young guy anymore. Even Gretzky declined. Most players do once they hit a certain age. Listen, it's not an easy sport to play. The demands on your body are heavy, you can only keep it up for so long, especially if you're a skill player.
he was still better than any player on our team now. And still is.

MikeyLikesHockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2008, 12:40 PM
  #41
NYR Sting
Heart and Soul
 
NYR Sting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
contructing a team isn't easy. And when you add the cap into the picture, it gets more difficult. I don't want to see the team "stagnate" with hopes of becoming a Stanley Cup-winning team. I want to see a team that has a chance to win the Stanley Cup each season. Unfortunately, one needs to be realistic about the makeup of this team, the prospects, the cap situations and then determine what the possibilities are. One also needs to realize that dismantling it and starting over means a couple years of growing pains, and then there would still be uncertainty as to whether or not it was done properly. Unforunately this team doesn't have real star power; the closest being Lundqivst. Unfortunately the player that's closest to being a young superstar on this team is already here (Staal) and is playing well - and there isn't a heck of a lot behind him at this moment. Unfortunately this team is up against the cap this season, and will have a tough time managing it in the next couple seasons. Everybody keeps talking about unloading contracts that are an albatross to this team - who wants an albatross unless they're getting rid of one themselves?

I will add this about Jagr, which applies to this season. At the end of the day, Jagr came through in the regular season and he came through in the playoffs. Can't imagine what this team would've done without him last season. And while he may not have looked like a superstar last season, other teams treated him as one which allowed guys like Drury and Gomez to go against second, third and fourth lines and have a heck of a lot less pressure on them. Jagr was the focus on the team and on his line. He had to deal with double-teams. He played with any winger which allowed Renney to have enormous flexibility in his lineup.

How does that relate to this season? A so-so regular season still led to a playoff series victory.
Your points are all valid, but I think they just point out the mistakes in judgment that Sather and Renney have made these past couple of years.

As for the playoffs, yes I enjoyed beating the Devils, but how many years in a row are you going to be satisfied with early playoff exits? Take a look at the Sharks. They have a great regular season every year and can't do anything in the playoffs. Obviously, that wasn't enough, since Ron Wilson, who is not a bad coach at all, got fired. I have to imagine that if that team, which is dominating this year, doesn't get pretty far this season, that Doug Wilson might be on the hot seat, too.

NYR Sting is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2008, 12:41 PM
  #42
NYR Sting
Heart and Soul
 
NYR Sting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeyLikesHockey View Post
he was still better than any player on our team now. And still is.
That isn't saying much. We don't have a single legitimate first line forward.

NYR Sting is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2008, 01:27 PM
  #43
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,230
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynRangersFan View Post
Okay, and again as I said in the Sather Backer thread - Lundqvist screws up all these alternate scenarios that people are throwing out there. Think about it - how does it work if you trade Gomez and Drury (which would be tantamount to never having signed them) for future picks and replacements a step or two below?

The cap space you save is NOT going to let you sign a superstar. They don't hit the open market. Period. They get locked up for long terms at a hometown discount for the teams they play for.

The decline in play is NOT going to be enough to let you draft one of the obvious superstars (like Tavares), 'cause Lundqvist ON HIS OWN prevents you from finishing in the bottom five, maybe ten.

So, your options are:

1) Trade Lundqvist - along with everyone else that you want gone - and REALLY blow it up.

2) Or, you can take the approach that management is trying which is to build incrementally from Lundqvist out and hope to get lucky either with the right trade, a hot Hank in the POs or a later round pick who pans out like the Detroit superstars.

There is no option 3 where you get to keep Hank AND get a top five pick (unless you steal it from another team - that doesn't have a franchise goalie - in a trade).
I agree, and personally i like the way the Rangers organization are doing things.

I like to have a winning team every year. Why settle for having a crap last place team?

There is nothing wrong with trying to win every year. As long as you don't sacrifice your future.

And the Rangers don't sacrifice their future. They have built a solid young group from with in. And have added a great young player in Zherdev via trade.

They have some real solid players that, on their current path and rate of development, will be solid NHL players when they make the jump. Grachev, Anisimov, Sanguinetti, Del Zotto.

I like what this organization is doing. I like the coaching staff.

The ONLY issue i have currently is that this team needs a goal scorer. They can't score. They need scoring help. I'm not thrilled with Redden's contract either. But whatever, sour grapes. I still like their make up. I like their farm system. I like the staff. I just think they need a legit scorer, a hard hitting defenseman, and some sand paper.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2008, 01:37 PM
  #44
DontStepanMe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Queens, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 5,383
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynRangersFan View Post
Okay, and again as I said in the Sather Backer thread - Lundqvist screws up all these alternate scenarios that people are throwing out there. Think about it - how does it work if you trade Gomez and Drury (which would be tantamount to never having signed them) for future picks and replacements a step or two below?

The cap space you save is NOT going to let you sign a superstar. They don't hit the open market. Period. They get locked up for long terms at a hometown discount for the teams they play for.

The decline in play is NOT going to be enough to let you draft one of the obvious superstars (like Tavares), 'cause Lundqvist ON HIS OWN prevents you from finishing in the bottom five, maybe ten.

So, your options are:

1) Trade Lundqvist - along with everyone else that you want gone - and REALLY blow it up.

2) Or, you can take the approach that management is trying which is to build incrementally from Lundqvist out and hope to get lucky either with the right trade, a hot Hank in the POs or a later round pick who pans out like the Detroit superstars.

There is no option 3 where you get to keep Hank AND get a top five pick (unless you steal it from another team - that doesn't have a franchise goalie - in a trade).

I think your missing something here though. lets say we do trade gomez and Drury. and we get a good prospect and a first rd pick this year per each player. That's 2 first rounders and 2 good prospects.

Now we have 3 first round picks in the draft this year. and two good prospects.
Not saying that we have to get tavares, but we could maybe trade all three first round picks and get the # 1 pick.

or we could just use our 3 first rounders and get maybe a Vanek, Perry and Getzlaf. or a Parise, Perry, Hossa. or 3 jessimans (picks do bust). Or another good solid stay at home dman and 2 high picks for forwards. Maybe we land in the top 10 and get a Filatov Russian who drops out of top 5.

Now that's up to 5 good prospects we get. To help speed along the rebuld.

Maybe we take those two prospects we receive and those two extra first rounders, and flip it for Kovy, or make a trade for Jbo.

There are alot more options that you have, and plus you have cap room to play with. All i'm saying is that there are many more options presented to you if you get rid of Gomez, Drury and Redden and get as many assets as you can.


Last edited by DontStepanMe: 12-23-2008 at 02:04 PM.
DontStepanMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2008, 01:50 PM
  #45
OneMinuteShift
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 105
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rags225 View Post
I think your missing something here though. lets say we do trade gomez and Drury. and we get a good prospect and a first rd pick this year.

Now we have 3 first round picks in the draft this year. and two good prospects.
Not saying that we have to get tavares, but we could maybe trade all three first round picks and get the # 1 pick.

or we could just use our 3 first rounders and get maybe a Vanek, Perry and Getzlaf. or a Parise, Perry, Hossa. or 3 jessimans (picks do bust). Or another good solid stay at home dman and 2 high picks for forwards. Maybe we land in the top 10 and get a Filatov Russian who drops out of top 5.

Now that's up to 5 good prospects we get. To help speed along the rebuld.

Maybe we take those two prospects we receive and those two extra first rounders, and flip it for Kovy, or make a trade for Jbo.

There are alot more options that you have, and plus you have cap room to play with. All i'm saying is that there are many more options presented to you if you get rid of Gomez, Drury and Redden and get as many assets as you can.
Wow, you are totally playing XBOX hockey, not NHL. Unreal !

Not to mention your total waste of asset management in the scenario where you traded all those players and picks for 1 player ! I hope you're not an aspiring NHL GM.

OneMinuteShift is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2008, 02:01 PM
  #46
DontStepanMe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Queens, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 5,383
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OneMinuteShift View Post
Wow, you are totally playing XBOX hockey, not NHL. Unreal !

Not to mention your total waste of asset management in the scenario where you traded all those players and picks for 1 player ! I hope you're not an aspiring NHL GM.
sorry didn't clarify myself. when I said get a Perry, Getzlaf, Vanek.... i didn't mean get the actual player. I meant draft a player like that. Meaning a star player, but not quite a world changer. It's supposed to be an extremely deep year for forwards.

didn't write it out well. So if this year is supposed to be like 2003 we could end up w/ three good forwards if we had three first round picks. or a good dman and two good forwards. or any combination to put it simply. but we could also end up w/ three Jessimans.


also, we would just be losing Gomez and Drury. in my OP. Tell me if Atlanta said we'll trade you Kovy for Gomez and Drury straight up you wouldn't do it. Not only do you lose two bad contracts, but you get a world changing player. Not saying atl would ever do this. I'm saying that Atl would do it for a bunch of first rounders and some good prospects. So if we can get first rounders and prospects for gomez and drury and flip it around and get Kovy. Than i think that would be amazing asset management.
the trades for Kovy, or Jbo, or to move up could be done. Especially if you have 3 first rounders. People really overrated how much it will actually take to get kovy or Jbo. Especially if they aren't going to come back. and we would have plenty of cap room to resign them. something some teams might not have.

DontStepanMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2008, 02:10 PM
  #47
NYR Viper
Moderator
 
NYR Viper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 29,531
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynRangersFan View Post
Okay, and again as I said in the Sather Backer thread - Lundqvist screws up all these alternate scenarios that people are throwing out there. Think about it - how does it work if you trade Gomez and Drury (which would be tantamount to never having signed them) for future picks and replacements a step or two below?

The cap space you save is NOT going to let you sign a superstar. They don't hit the open market. Period. They get locked up for long terms at a hometown discount for the teams they play for.

The decline in play is NOT going to be enough to let you draft one of the obvious superstars (like Tavares), 'cause Lundqvist ON HIS OWN prevents you from finishing in the bottom five, maybe ten.

So, your options are:

1) Trade Lundqvist - along with everyone else that you want gone - and REALLY blow it up.

2) Or, you can take the approach that management is trying which is to build incrementally from Lundqvist out and hope to get lucky either with the right trade, a hot Hank in the POs or a later round pick who pans out like the Detroit superstars.

There is no option 3 where you get to keep Hank AND get a top five pick (unless you steal it from another team - that doesn't have a franchise goalie - in a trade).

one word describes this post.......






PERFECT

NYR Viper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2008, 02:15 PM
  #48
NYR Viper
Moderator
 
NYR Viper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 29,531
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupersonicMonkey View Post
I agree, and personally i like the way the Rangers organization are doing things.

I like to have a winning team every year. Why settle for having a crap last place team?

There is nothing wrong with trying to win every year. As long as you don't sacrifice your future.

And the Rangers don't sacrifice their future. They have built a solid young group from with in. And have added a great young player in Zherdev via trade.

They have some real solid players that, on their current path and rate of development, will be solid NHL players when they make the jump. Grachev, Anisimov, Sanguinetti, Del Zotto.

I like what this organization is doing. I like the coaching staff.

The ONLY issue i have currently is that this team needs a goal scorer. They can't score. They need scoring help. I'm not thrilled with Redden's contract either. But whatever, sour grapes. I still like their make up. I like their farm system. I like the staff. I just think they need a legit scorer, a hard hitting defenseman, and some sand paper.
This is a great post as well.....

I also like the way the Rangers are rebuilding, through winning. Although i dont like the contracts given out to both redden and rozsival i am hoping that was a move to hopefully get a pick back if sather wants to trade them elsewhere.

NYR Viper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2008, 02:26 PM
  #49
OneMinuteShift
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 105
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rags225 View Post
sorry didn't clarify myself. when I said get a Perry, Getzlaf, Vanek.... i didn't mean get the actual player. I meant draft a player like that. Meaning a star player, but not quite a world changer. It's supposed to be an extremely deep year for forwards.

didn't write it out well. So if this year is supposed to be like 2003 we could end up w/ three good forwards if we had three first round picks. or a good dman and two good forwards. or any combination to put it simply. but we could also end up w/ three Jessimans.


also, we would just be losing Gomez and Drury. in my OP. Tell me if Atlanta said we'll trade you Kovy for Gomez and Drury straight up you wouldn't do it. Not only do you lose two bad contracts, but you get a world changing player. Not saying atl would ever do this. I'm saying that Atl would do it for a bunch of first rounders and some good prospects. So if we can get first rounders and prospects for gomez and drury and flip it around and get Kovy. Than i think that would be amazing asset management.
the trades for Kovy, or Jbo, or to move up could be done. Especially if you have 3 first rounders. People really overrated how much it will actually take to get kovy or Jbo. Especially if they aren't going to come back. and we would have plenty of cap room to resign them. something some teams might not have.
I'm sorry guy, its still Xbox talk.

The 93 & 99 drafts was supposed to be two of the deepest ever ! Things dont always work out, I'd say they dont more than they do at this point from what i've seen in watching many drafts over the years. 2003 was special, its not gonna happen very often.

What you're saying here is a huge huge risk that if it doesn't payoff we could be doomed for another 7 years. At least with the group we now have some depth where as in past years we didn't.

I'm sorry if you think this team should win the cup every year, or even this year, we should be realistic. I think the organization has gotten stronger the last few years and youth will be served, but they have to learn first - every championship team does. Then we'll have a solid group of guys in their prime, mixed with some vets that will hopefully be a real contender. That's all i ask as a fan.

OneMinuteShift is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2008, 02:30 PM
  #50
DontStepanMe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Queens, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 5,383
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OneMinuteShift View Post
I'm sorry guy, its still Xbox talk.

The 93 & 99 drafts was supposed to be two of the deepest ever ! Things dont always work out, I'd say they dont more than they do at this point from what i've seen in watching many drafts over the years. 2003 was special, its not gonna happen very often.

What you're saying here is a huge huge risk that if it doesn't payoff we could be doomed for another 7 years. At least with the group we now have some depth where as in past years we didn't.

I'm sorry if you think this team should win the cup every year, or even this year, we should be realistic. I think the organization has gotten stronger the last few years and youth will be served, but they have to learn first - every championship team does. Then we'll have a solid group of guys in their prime, mixed with some vets that will hopefully be a real contender. That's all i ask as a fan.
and I think we are doomed for at least another 5 years after this season... which is coincidentally the time when the last of our horrible contracts will be off the team in Redden and Gomez. I don't see this team contending before they get rid of at least two of Redden, Gomez, and Drury. Prefereably in that order.

DontStepanMe 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 02:51 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.