HFBoards

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

Ryane Clowe

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-29-2010, 11:16 AM
  #51
Orr Nightmare
Registered User
 
Orr Nightmare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by howztheglass View Post
Frolov
and
MCD

For

Clowe

S.J is looking for D-man not picks and they're not taking Gilroy or Rosi.With the way Sauer stepped up maybe MCD becomes available for the right price of course.
not bad...i would hate to give up MCD...could we put the Tank in instead or is MCD the sexier name?

Orr Nightmare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-29-2010, 01:00 PM
  #52
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 Orr Nightmare View Post
No player is untouchable!

For the right price anyone could be had...

No one knows what their price would be.
It's really not all that difficult to construct a reasonable hypothesis IF you know what you're talking about.

Quote:
Sting, I brought up Little because you wanted a brainy guy over a beast.
What exactly makes Little a "brainy" player? He's hardly what I had in mind when I made that comment.

Quote:
When I made my comparisons of Gionta, Little and Huselius, you dismissed all of them as third line players...
I did nothing of the sort. It's hard to have a debate with someone when all they do is respond with hyperbole rather than make rational points.

Quote:
I made a trade suggestion for Clowe...I asked you to make a similar trade suggestion and you go off on a pointless tirade.
If by pointless tirade you mean giving my point of view, that there is no similar trade suggestion to be made because this team doesn't need redundant role players, then yes...pointless tirade, indeed.

Quote:
Brad Richards is a very good player...definietly not worth the money or stripping our prospect pool to get him...that is the only argument you have made...please offer up some other suggestions.
Again, my argument is that there are no other suggestions. Any other realistic trade possibility (other than a rental like Connolly or possibly Koivu if the Ducks are out of it) right now does not make the Rangers a much better team, and probably costs more than the Rangers should pay. Unlike Richards, who would give the Rangers one of the best first lines in the league, allow them to have one of the best second lines in the league, and would drastically reverse the Rangers PP fortunes, a huge element of success in today's NHL. But it makes sense that you think he's not worth the money or the "stripping of the prospect pool," yet you're apparently willing to deal McDonagh (likely the primary piece in any Richards trade) so that you can get a player who is at best slightly better than Frolov.

Quote:
This board is pointless all of the time...I get a kick out of how very little most Rangers actually know about hockey.
Right, like when people try to draw empty comparisons between players that have hardly anything in common other than their height and/or weight.

Quote:
I am not looking to field a team full of goons...I am lookiing for a blend...kinda of like the 1994 team...but Sting and a few others want to field a team of Petr Nedved, Radek Dvorak and Jan Hlvac, oh wait...we have had that for the last 15 years.
You are looking for a blend, yet for a team that has plenty of "grit" and is sorely lacking in talent, you're suggesting trades that barely address the team's largest problem. Nothing I've ever said would suggest that I want to field a team of Petr Nedveds, Dvoraks, or Hlavacs. Petr Nedved is hardly a brainy player. If anything, a lack of brains was the biggest reason Petr Nedved was a career underachiever that never played up to his potential. I'm also amused at how you take brainy to mean soft, underachieving, European players, because clearly, those two things are one and the same.

NYR Sting is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-29-2010, 01:35 PM
  #53
Orr Nightmare
Registered User
 
Orr Nightmare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sting36e View Post
LOL. It's funny that your entire argument rests on comparing the league's best power forwards to average 2nd/3rd liners. Why don't you try comparing them to the best of the best non-PFs. David Backes is the elite of NHL power forwards, and you're comparing him to an average second liner WITH laziness issues.

Also, if you'd take Ryane Clowe over Bryan Little... and I'm the one that doesn't know hockey.

Look at the best players on the league's best teams. Every single one of the league's best teams, the top players are heady players, not physical beasts. Brains will always beat brawn.
I guess I read this wrong.

Orr Nightmare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-29-2010, 01:36 PM
  #54
Orr Nightmare
Registered User
 
Orr Nightmare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sting36e View Post
It's really not all that difficult to construct a reasonable hypothesis IF you know what you're talking about.



What exactly makes Little a "brainy" player? He's hardly what I had in mind when I made that comment.



I did nothing of the sort. It's hard to have a debate with someone when all they do is respond with hyperbole rather than make rational points.



If by pointless tirade you mean giving my point of view, that there is no similar trade suggestion to be made because this team doesn't need redundant role players, then yes...pointless tirade, indeed.



Again, my argument is that there are no other suggestions. Any other realistic trade possibility (other than a rental like Connolly or possibly Koivu if the Ducks are out of it) right now does not make the Rangers a much better team, and probably costs more than the Rangers should pay. Unlike Richards, who would give the Rangers one of the best first lines in the league, allow them to have one of the best second lines in the league, and would drastically reverse the Rangers PP fortunes, a huge element of success in today's NHL. But it makes sense that you think he's not worth the money or the "stripping of the prospect pool," yet you're apparently willing to deal McDonagh (likely the primary piece in any Richards trade) so that you can get a player who is at best slightly better than Frolov.



Right, like when people try to draw empty comparisons between players that have hardly anything in common other than their height and/or weight.



You are looking for a blend, yet for a team that has plenty of "grit" and is sorely lacking in talent, you're suggesting trades that barely address the team's largest problem. Nothing I've ever said would suggest that I want to field a team of Petr Nedveds, Dvoraks, or Hlavacs. Petr Nedved is hardly a brainy player. If anything, a lack of brains was the biggest reason Petr Nedved was a career underachiever that never played up to his potential. I'm also amused at how you take brainy to mean soft, underachieving, European players, because clearly, those two things are one and the same.
Ok...lets trade for Brad Richards...what are we sending in return.

I am not sure if you can read but I didn't suggest MCD...I said Valentko!

Orr Nightmare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-29-2010, 07:33 PM
  #55
Orr Nightmare
Registered User
 
Orr Nightmare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,605
vCash: 500
How anyone can say the Rangers have enough size is baffling...

Look at the Penguins lineup...Rupp, Godard, Cooke, Talbot, Kennedy, Engelland, Adams, Asham, Kunitz, Lovejoy and Orpik...that is 11 players.

We have Prust.

That seems about right!

Orr Nightmare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-29-2010, 08:29 PM
  #56
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 Orr Nightmare View Post
I guess I read this wrong.
You named 4 guys: Gionta, Huselius, Little, Stillman. 3 second liners and 1 third liner (at this point in his career).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Orr Nightmare View Post
Ok...lets trade for Brad Richards...what are we sending in return.

I am not sure if you can read but I didn't suggest MCD...I said Valentko!
Frolov and McD for Clowe...your response: "not bad"

I understand you'd rather give up Valentenko, but based on your words, it would seem you're willing to pull the trigger on that. "Not bad" is hardly how I'd describe that. "No chance in hell," would probably be my take on that offer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Orr Nightmare View Post
How anyone can say the Rangers have enough size is baffling...

Look at the Penguins lineup...Rupp, Godard, Cooke, Talbot, Kennedy, Engelland, Adams, Asham, Kunitz, Lovejoy and Orpik...that is 11 players.

We have Prust.

That seems about right!
Only 5 of those 11 players are over six feet and one of them is Godard, who rarely plays. 6 if you count Malkin. To contrast, the Rangers have 14 players over six feet in stature.

NYR Sting is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-29-2010, 08:34 PM
  #57
Orr Nightmare
Registered User
 
Orr Nightmare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sting36e View Post
You named 4 guys: Gionta, Huselius, Little, Stillman. 3 second liners and 1 third liner (at this point in his career).



Frolov and McD for Clowe...your response: "not bad"

I understand you'd rather give up Valentenko, but based on your words, it would seem you're willing to pull the trigger on that. "Not bad" is hardly how I'd describe that. "No chance in hell," would probably be my take on that offer.



Only 5 of those 11 players are over six feet and one of them is Godard, who rarely plays. 6 if you count Malkin. To contrast, the Rangers have 14 players over six feet in stature.
You are right...all of your arguements are 100% correct.

Brad Richards for Kreider, Werek, McD, McILrath(terrible pick anyway)...is that enough to get Richards are do we need to sweeten it?

Orr Nightmare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-29-2010, 08:37 PM
  #58
Orr Nightmare
Registered User
 
Orr Nightmare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sting36e View Post
You named 4 guys: Gionta, Huselius, Little, Stillman. 3 second liners and 1 third liner (at this point in his career).



Frolov and McD for Clowe...your response: "not bad"

I understand you'd rather give up Valentenko, but based on your words, it would seem you're willing to pull the trigger on that. "Not bad" is hardly how I'd describe that. "No chance in hell," would probably be my take on that offer.



Only 5 of those 11 players are over six feet and one of them is Godard, who rarely plays. 6 if you count Malkin. To contrast, the Rangers have 14 players over six feet in stature.
Asham is 5'10" that must mean he is soft according to your theory, is that a fair assessment?

Orr Nightmare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-29-2010, 08:37 PM
  #59
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 14,694
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orr Nightmare View Post
How anyone can say the Rangers have enough size is baffling...

Look at the Penguins lineup...Rupp, Godard, Cooke, Talbot, Kennedy, Engelland, Adams, Asham, Kunitz, Lovejoy and Orpik...that is 11 players.

We have Prust.

That seems about right!
See, when I watch a game like this, I think that talent, rather than size, played a MUCH bigger role in the end result - specifically this teams lack of talent at center.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-29-2010, 08:40 PM
  #60
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 Orr Nightmare View Post
You are right...all of your arguements are 100% correct.

Brad Richards for Kreider, Werek, McD, McILrath(terrible pick anyway)...is that enough to get Richards are do we need to sweeten it?
What a surprise. Instead of making a real point, you just come back with a bunch of ********. If it ain't broke, why fix it, right?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Orr Nightmare View Post
Asham is 5'10" that must mean he is soft according to your theory, is that a fair assessment?
LOL. Now you're twisting your OWN words. YOU said that this team doesn't have any SIZE. You didn't say anything about being soft. I just pointed out to you how we have much more size than they do. I said nothing about being soft.

NYR Sting is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-29-2010, 08:46 PM
  #61
Orr Nightmare
Registered User
 
Orr Nightmare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
See, when I watch a game like this, I think that talent, rather than size, played a MUCH bigger role in the end result - specifically this teams lack of talent at center.
I agree the Rangers are not nearly as talented...that is not in question...but since we do not have the talent we must find a niche and that is to outwork everyone and outhit everyone...I am looking to add another dimension to that equation without severely depleting our prospect pool.

We have several prospects who will score in the future, Kreider, Werek, Thomas, Grachev(hopefully), Zuccerallo and possibly Bourque.

We do not have a foward with that size and snarl who can neautralize the opposition aggresion!

Orr Nightmare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-29-2010, 08:54 PM
  #62
Orr Nightmare
Registered User
 
Orr Nightmare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sting36e View Post
What a surprise. Instead of making a real point, you just come back with a bunch of ********. If it ain't broke, why fix it, right?



LOL. Now you're twisting your OWN words. YOU said that this team doesn't have any SIZE. You didn't say anything about being soft. I just pointed out to you how we have much more size than they do. I said nothing about being soft.
What is your point?

You been babbling for two days and all you do is pick apart what I say but you haven't offered s**t.

You make no sense...I said we need size...in size I mean a guy who will not take any *****...Michal Rozival is 6'2 210 and is one of the biggest pu**ies in the league.

Prust fights guys 5 inches taller and 30 pounds heavier and you wouldn't even have him on your team.

Orr Nightmare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-29-2010, 09:06 PM
  #63
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 Orr Nightmare View Post
What is your point?

You been babbling for two days and all you do is pick apart what I say but you haven't offered s**t.
I've made my point repeatedly. And I'm not the only one that's made it. If you aren't able to identify what that is, I can't help you there. What you haven't done is come up with a single sensible response to any of what I've had to say.

Quote:
You make no sense...I said we need size...in size I mean a guy who will not take any *****...Michal Rozival is 6'2 210 and is one of the biggest pu**ies in the league.
Ah. So you meant toughness, but you said size...and I'm the one that makes no sense? Maybe if you chose your words more carefully, there would be less confusion.

Rozsival is a *****...why? Because he doesn't fight? Because he's not a hitter? I don't remember seeing Niklas Lidstrom ever rely too much on physicality, so I guess he's a *****, too. **** those six Norris trophies, the guy doesn't punch people in the face 50 times a game, so he must be worthless.

Why would you rely on physicality if you don't have to? Rozsival is a solid defenseman because he's strong enough positionally and with his stick that he doesn't have to take himself out of position or expose himself to unnecessary punishment. Players that have to rely a lot on physicality are players that, except for a few rare exceptions, do so because they aren't good enough at anything else. They have no choice.

Quote:
Prust fights guys 5 inches taller and 30 pounds heavier and you wouldn't even have him on your team.
Ah...putting words in people's mouths...what you do best. I love Prust. He's a great 4th liner. He has to fight guys 5 inches taller and 30 pounds heavier. He doesn't score any goals or provide any offense, so he has no choice. It's a shame you don't win games based on the amount of hits you throw or the amount of fights you get into, though. If you did, then Pruster would be the answer to all our problems.

NYR Sting is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2010, 06:35 AM
  #64
Orr Nightmare
Registered User
 
Orr Nightmare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sting36e View Post
I've made my point repeatedly. And I'm not the only one that's made it. If you aren't able to identify what that is, I can't help you there. What you haven't done is come up with a single sensible response to any of what I've had to say.



Ah. So you meant toughness, but you said size...and I'm the one that makes no sense? Maybe if you chose your words more carefully, there would be less confusion.

Rozsival is a *****...why? Because he doesn't fight? Because he's not a hitter? I don't remember seeing Niklas Lidstrom ever rely too much on physicality, so I guess he's a *****, too. **** those six Norris trophies, the guy doesn't punch people in the face 50 times a game, so he must be worthless.

Why would you rely on physicality if you don't have to? Rozsival is a solid defenseman because he's strong enough positionally and with his stick that he doesn't have to take himself out of position or expose himself to unnecessary punishment. Players that have to rely a lot on physicality are players that, except for a few rare exceptions, do so because they aren't good enough at anything else. They have no choice.



Ah...putting words in people's mouths...what you do best. I love Prust. He's a great 4th liner. He has to fight guys 5 inches taller and 30 pounds heavier. He doesn't score any goals or provide any offense, so he has no choice. It's a shame you don't win games based on the amount of hits you throw or the amount of fights you get into, though. If you did, then Pruster would be the answer to all our problems.
Now you are comparing Rozy to Lidstrom...

Orr Nightmare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2010, 09:27 AM
  #65
Jxmarts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 340
vCash: 500
I hate to break it to you guys... But Kreider & McDonagh have little trade value right now. They are both struggling to perform at their respective levels. Just because they were selected in the 1st round a few years doesn't mean they've retained their value. See Montoya, Jessiman or Sanguinetti. They need to demonstrate they're equipped to thrive at the next level, and at the moment they're both stalling.

It's not to say they won't overcome it - there's still time for them. But if you're expecting to get a lot back in a trade for them, it's not going to happen.

Jxmarts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2010, 10:28 AM
  #66
vipernsx
Flatus Expeller
 
vipernsx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 6,342
vCash: 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orr Nightmare View Post
What type of package would it take to get him from San Jose, if they would even consider moving him:

I will start with:

Ryan Bourque
Roman Horak
& maybe 2011 2nd round pick

I would then put him on the top line with AA/Stepan and Gabby

What do you guys think?
I'm a big Ryan Clowe fan....however...

http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=845214

vipernsx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2010, 10:38 AM
  #67
JeffMangum
A Love Supreme
 
JeffMangum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Listening to music
Country: United States
Posts: 54,795
vCash: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jxmarts View Post
I hate to break it to you guys... But Kreider & McDonagh have little trade value right now. They are both struggling to perform at their respective levels. Just because they were selected in the 1st round a few years doesn't mean they've retained their value. See Montoya, Jessiman or Sanguinetti. They need to demonstrate they're equipped to thrive at the next level, and at the moment they're both stalling.

It's not to say they won't overcome it - there's still time for them. But if you're expecting to get a lot back in a trade for them, it's not going to happen.
The Rangers don't want to trade Kreider, their best prospect.

__________________

#TannerGlass2014
SEEN YOUR VIDEO!
#SheWentToHarvard
JeffMangum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2010, 12:35 PM
  #68
Jxmarts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 340
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Boyle View Post
The Rangers don't want to trade Kreider, their best prospect.
That may be true, but he didn't have a outstanding freshman year last year & he's struggling this year. I've been around here long enough to know it's heresy to criticize certain Ranger prospects, but the fact is that if a prospect isn't dominating college hockey by his sophmore year, then he probably doesn't have the skills to excel in the NHL. Examples to the contrary are few & far between. Future role player, maybe... best prospect, no.

I think McIlrath & Christian Thomas have more trade value than Kreider at the moment. I'm not necessarily giving up on Kreider. He has time to turn it around. I'm just saying that his value as a trade chip & a prospect, because of his mediocre production so far, is not what most of us think it is.

Jxmarts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2010, 12:37 PM
  #69
Orr Nightmare
Registered User
 
Orr Nightmare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vipernsx View Post
I'm a big Ryan Clowe fan....however...

http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=845214
Ok...make it a third rounder then...

Orr Nightmare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2010, 08:58 PM
  #70
rangerssharks414
Registered User
 
rangerssharks414's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 10,345
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by howztheglass View Post
Frolov
and
MCD

For

Clowe

S.J is looking for D-man not picks and they're not taking Gilroy or Rosi.With the way Sauer stepped up maybe MCD becomes available for the right price of course.
The Sharks are looking for someone who's a top four defenseman right now. Unless they get that, Clowe isn't going anywhere. They don't need another very inexperienced defenseman. Last night, they played three defensemen with a combined 47 NHL games between them entering the game, and they were brutal.

And I don't want Frolov going from one of my teams to another. If the Rangers get rid of Frolov, please don't give him up to the Sharks.

rangerssharks414 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2010, 11:37 PM
  #71
gravytrain6t
Registered User
 
gravytrain6t's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 2,867
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orr Nightmare View Post
How anyone can say the Rangers have enough size is baffling...

Look at the Penguins lineup...Rupp, Godard, Cooke, Talbot, Kennedy, Engelland, Adams, Asham, Kunitz, Lovejoy and Orpik...that is 11 players.

We have Prust.

That seems about right!

We do have Prust but you have to throw a few more guys in there. Obviously Boogaard is tough but the team has other "grind it out" players who are more than willing to play a tough, physical game (i.e.. Callahan, Dubinsky, Boyle, Avery, and, as you mentioned, Prust).

That's at least 2 full lines of scrappy, rough, hard nosed forechecker's who can (for the most part) handle themselves on the ice and will not play a soft game. On "D" everyone can play physical except for Rozsival (I wish they had kept Morris) and Gilroy. Del Zotto's not big but he's a young feisty blue liner who should become a tremendous asset for this team as the years pass and he gets stronger.

Really (and imo) what I think this team needs could have been acquired in the past but our scouts messed up and now it's too late until we get our next opportunity.

It's been mentioned over and over again but the 03' draft is what's currently holding this team back right now, and heading into the future.

The fact that Rangers scouts passed up on Parise, Richards, Getzlaf, Perry, Backes, etc...is killing this team (Brown as well). All of these players (technically we could have come away with 2 of them when including Backes) are sort of "hybrid type" players.

They can play the game just like the players I named above, but they have more skill (If that's the definition of a power forward than be it. I think of a power forward as someone who's strong as an ox in front of the net and picks up a ton of "garbage goals" but is not exactly the best skater and puck handler in the world).

Mix that embarrassing draft year with the death of Cherepanov, some atrocious free agent signings (although the team is sorely lacking and in need of Drury to come back and perhaps win a faceoff) and here we are. The only way to get a top 3 (just in general) forward is by giving up big name prospects within the organization and I don't think many Rangers fans are on board with that.

So the mediocrity continues and like Jagr, the reality is the team is probably better off without Gaborik and Frolov. Not unless you truly value the long term success of Lundqvist over that of the team's.

No doubt, Clowe is a good player. But if he can't get a cup ring in San Jose with players like Thorton, Marleau, Heatley, and Pavelski,
I can't see it happening here. If the team doesn't have what it takes to make a legitimate run for the Cup, I don't see the point in trading away (potential) future assets for Clowe. IMO, continue to build through the draft (and possibly smaller type trades) and developing the kids while players on the current roster continue to get better and find some chemistry. Once a legit playoff team, than go out and get the missing pieces (or one big piece).

gravytrain6t is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2010, 02:22 AM
  #72
Jxmarts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 340
vCash: 500
Thank you for your kind & insightful sentiments...

As I anticipated, some fans will consider it heresy to contradict the hype about certain 1st round picks. I heard the same thing when I cast doubt about prospects like Brendl (goin' way back), Montoya & Sanguinetti. I also got similar reactions when I criticized lesser prospects like Matt Gilroy, Nigel Williams & Dane Byers.

What I am saying is that in order for a 1st rounder to maintain his trade value, he needs to demonstrate continual improvement & that he can excel at the next level. If he struggles, then his value in the eyes of other general managers diminishes. Kreider had an ok freshman year, but he's struggling in his sophmore year. If he continues to struggle this season (I did state he still had time to turn it around), it would be a bad omen because there are very few players who had blossomed into top 6 NHL forwards after struggling (especially taking a step backwards) in their sophmore year of college. If you have examples to the contrary, I would be happy to stand corrected.

If I know this, then I'm certain other GM's know this as well. Kreider's trade value is not what most of us think it is because he is having a bad year when he should be progressing. If this means I'm a drunk, then I'm sorry. I should drink more Kool-Aid instead.


Last edited by nyr2k2: 12-02-2010 at 05:33 PM.
Jxmarts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2010, 03:57 PM
  #73
XLJ
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 1,356
vCash: 500
Clowe is a nice player but he would be a little redundant on this team. Honestly most of the rangers forwards play with grit. Clowe is a better figher but imo Dubi is the better player. Clowe is on a stacked team his numbers wont look as good on the rangers. They need to focus on adding another top line skilled player. That is team most glaring need.

They could add a mean sob on blueline. But that is really the only area where you can make the case they need to add more toughness.

XLJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2010, 07:09 AM
  #74
Orr Nightmare
Registered User
 
Orr Nightmare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by msg View Post
Clowe is a nice player but he would be a little redundant on this team. Honestly most of the rangers forwards play with grit. Clowe is a better figher but imo Dubi is the better player. Clowe is on a stacked team his numbers wont look as good on the rangers. They need to focus on adding another top line skilled player. That is team most glaring need.

They could add a mean sob on blueline. But that is really the only area where you can make the case they need to add more toughness.
I disagree...the Rangers might have grit but they do not have amply players to play the rough and tumble games vs. the Flyers, Pens, Avalanche, Sharks and the like...

Take last nights game for example...the Islanders 4th line of Gillies, Martin and Konapka, could had and should have just made life miserable for the Rangers skilled players...add in Hamonic who is going to be a very good player and has snarl.

We have Boogie and Prust and once u take Boogey off the ice we have Prust.

We might have guys who are willing but we do not have the intimadation factor.

I love Sauer but he is a terrible fighter, I love Dubi but he is a terrible fighter (unless he is fighting Mike Richards.

I think, in addition to the elite scorer/setup man we need a power forward, for example Adam Graves...we can say we have grit but Dubi, Cally, Boyle, Sauer and Avery are all terrible fighters and do not instill fear into the opposing team.

I think Clowe could be that guy...but I am not saying he is the only guy...there are others.

Orr Nightmare 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 06:12 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.