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

Youth Has Been Served

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-28-2011, 11:28 AM
  #201
Jersey Girl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,956
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupersonicMonkey View Post
Del Zotto was on the NHL roster for half the season. What do you mean he couldn't crack the lineup? He played 47 games in the NHL this year.
My goodness, there is more spin in your posts than a merry-go-round. Del Zotto did not have a good season this year. Period. Carlson did.

Jersey Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2011, 11:32 AM
  #202
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,230
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jersey Girl View Post
My goodness, there is more spin in your posts than a merry-go-round. Del Zotto did not have a good season this year. Period. Carlson did.
Wrong again. You're the one spinning things.

You're the one that migrated the conversation from how you believe failed draft picks are exclusive the the New York Rangers, to John Carlson being leaps and bounds better then Del Zotto and your wrong on all accounts.

Del Zotto had a bad year at the age of 20.

I don't care, he was a great pick and will improve as he gets older. Del Zotto has far more upside then Carlson. Del Zotto's vision and skill didn't disappear. He needs to improve his consistency in the defensive end.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2011, 11:33 AM
  #203
Jersey Girl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,956
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupersonicMonkey View Post
Del Zotto has far more upside then Carlson. Del Zotto's vision and skill didn't disappear.
That's your opinion, which you are certainly entitled to. But it's not fact. Carlson has skill and vision too.

Jersey Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2011, 12:15 PM
  #204
Vito Andolini
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 923
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nemchinov13 View Post
About Dan Blackburn. The kid won 20 NHL games before turning 20. Doesn't sound like much, but let's not forget the kind of Ranger teams he had to play behind. Don't think any goalie would've done better with those Ranger teams.
If this is true then why were his #'s significantly worse than the other goalies on the team: Richter & Dunham in his 2 years?

Let's face facts here...Blackburn was a good kid and was put in an impossible situation by NYR management...but there's absolutely no evidence that he was on his way to becoming a top goalie in this league.

Vito Andolini is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2011, 12:55 PM
  #205
allstar3970
Registered User
 
allstar3970's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,227
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vito Andolini View Post
If this is true then why were his #'s significantly worse than the other goalies on the team: Richter & Dunham in his 2 years?

Let's face facts here...Blackburn was a good kid and was put in an impossible situation by NYR management...but there's absolutely no evidence that he was on his way to becoming a top goalie in this league.
hard to judge either way i guess, he was 18-19 years old. I'm with you though, I wouldn't rush to say he would have been a top guy based on intangible things like poise/attitude.

allstar3970 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2011, 02:20 PM
  #206
chosen
Registered User
 
chosen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,998
vCash: 500
Almost ten pages of posts and not one person has been able to tell me who is a goal scorer on the Rangers, but at least I learned that Blackburn was going to be a franchise goaltender.

chosen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2011, 02:30 PM
  #207
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 16,293
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chosen View Post
Almost ten pages of posts and not one person has been able to tell me who is a goal scorer on the Rangers, but at least I learned that Blackburn was going to be a franchise goaltender.
I really think some people envision some sort of socialistic team stuffed with homegrown players who can all score 50-60 points.

Unfortunately, the NHL doesnt work that way.

I also, admittedly, dont have an answer to your question. Signing Brad Richards and hoping he clicks with Gaborik is this franchise's best hope to have a lethal goal scorer.

But if you're speaking about just the youth, nope, theres no answer out there - which is why people go off on tangents about Cherepanov.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2011, 02:51 PM
  #208
Zil
Registered User
 
Zil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 4,304
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
I really think some people envision some sort of socialistic team stuffed with homegrown players who can all score 50-60 points.

Unfortunately, the NHL doesnt work that way.

I also, admittedly, dont have an answer to your question. Signing Brad Richards and hoping he clicks with Gaborik is this franchise's best hope to have a lethal goal scorer.

But if you're speaking about just the youth, nope, theres no answer out there - which is why people go off on tangents about Cherepanov.
People don't envision a team of 50-60 point guys. They envision Stepan developing into a possible first-line center. They envision Kreider and Thomas developing into our big goal scorers. And frankly, most of them envision us signing Brad Richards too. Whether or not any of that happens is unclear. I, however, have faith in the Rangers' current direction. I'm not forgiving Sather for his pre-lockout blunders or his post-lockout bad free agent signings, but things are looking up. You may not be convinced of this, but we're going to find out one way or the other. You can complain about how you think we're not going to get any better all you want, but there's no reason to talk about those of us supporting the youth movement like we're lobotomized drones.

Zil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2011, 03:33 PM
  #209
SickNice
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Hoboken, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 485
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zil View Post
People don't envision a team of 50-60 point guys. They envision Stepan developing into a possible first-line center. They envision Kreider and Thomas developing into our big goal scorers. And frankly, most of them envision us signing Brad Richards too. Whether or not any of that happens is unclear. I, however, have faith in the Rangers' current direction. I'm not forgiving Sather for his pre-lockout blunders or his post-lockout bad free agent signings, but things are looking up. You may not be convinced of this, but we're going to find out one way or the other. You can complain about how you think we're not going to get any better all you want, but there's no reason to talk about those of us supporting the youth movement like we're lobotomized drones.
Yeah but envisioning is just that, envisioning. Pavel Brendl was supposed to be a dominant first-line winger. Jamie Lundmark was supposed to be a dominant first-line center. Evgeny Grachev was supposed to be a top 6 forward (I'd be surprised if he plays more than a few games as a Ranger before he's gone). Bobby Sanguinetti, not a goal scorer, but the next Brian Leetch. Lauri Korpikoski was going to develop into a second line forward. Dane Byers a solid third-liner who could play second-line time. The list goes on.

The point is that aside from Gaborik, maybe Krieder and maybe Thomas, there isn't anyone at any level of the organization that you could say is a goal scorer.

SickNice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2011, 03:49 PM
  #210
Zil
Registered User
 
Zil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 4,304
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SickNice View Post
Yeah but envisioning is just that, envisioning. Pavel Brendl was supposed to be a dominant first-line winger. Jamie Lundmark was supposed to be a dominant first-line center. Evgeny Grachev was supposed to be a top 6 forward (I'd be surprised if he plays more than a few games as a Ranger before he's gone). Bobby Sanguinetti, not a goal scorer, but the next Brian Leetch. Lauri Korpikoski was going to develop into a second line forward. Dane Byers a solid third-liner who could play second-line time. The list goes on.

The point is that aside from Gaborik, maybe Krieder and maybe Thomas, there isn't anyone at any level of the organization that you could say is a goal scorer.
You can't compare the current crop of prospects to Lundmark and Brendl. That's absurd. Those guys weren't even Sather picks. They were Neil Smith's doing. Clark didn't draft Sanguinetti, Byers, or Korpikoski. Grachev is still a good prospect. He's 21 and was a third-round pick who by all accounts played very well in Hartford this year. If the biggest thing you can hang on Clark is that a third-rounder might not pan out, then he's doing a pretty damn good job. Look at the quality of the young core we've established. Clark's picks deserve the benefit of the doubt until they don't pan out. And honestly, how many high-end goal-scoring prospects do you think any organization has? There aren't that many guys that have that kind of potential. Organizations don't have 10 each in their back pockets. It's not like none of our other prospects have scoring potential either. Horak, Fasth, Werek, Yogan, and Bourque all have offensive talent. They just don't have first-line upside.

Zil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2011, 03:52 PM
  #211
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 16,293
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SickNice View Post
Yeah but envisioning is just that, envisioning. Pavel Brendl was supposed to be a dominant first-line winger. Jamie Lundmark was supposed to be a dominant first-line center. Evgeny Grachev was supposed to be a top 6 forward (I'd be surprised if he plays more than a few games as a Ranger before he's gone). Bobby Sanguinetti, not a goal scorer, but the next Brian Leetch. Lauri Korpikoski was going to develop into a second line forward. Dane Byers a solid third-liner who could play second-line time. The list goes on.

The point is that aside from Gaborik, maybe Krieder and maybe Thomas, there isn't anyone at any level of the organization that you could say is a goal scorer.
Bingo.

Something tells me Ill be making the same gripes a couple of years from now, and be bombarded about how the yet unnamed 2011/2012 first round picks seemd destined to make a huge impact with the big club.

Thats the wonderful thing about this stance - theres always a new flavor of the month prospect just around the corner.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2011, 03:58 PM
  #212
NHRangerfan
enfoonts
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: New Hampshire
Country: United States
Posts: 3,091
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerEsq View Post
It's getting really annoying reading comments from people who have no ability to analyse.

Gabby is in trouble because of injuries. He is also a skater, meaning his shelf life is shorter.

Lundqvist is a goalie and star goalies normally last into their late 30s. If you played any sports, you would know why. But instead people who play Nintendo can't understand the difference between a skater who gets hit and a goalie who does not.

Barring a groin or freak injury, Lundqvist has another 10 years. Gaborik will forget how to ice skate by then.

So please stop comparing injured forwards to goalies. It's just not the same.

Henrik just turned 29, but goalies that play the same style as he does do not last into their late 30's.

NHRangerfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2011, 04:01 PM
  #213
NHRangerfan
enfoonts
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: New Hampshire
Country: United States
Posts: 3,091
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerEsq View Post
No, video game mentality is that you can just add a player and make the team better.

I am not banking on Kreider, Thomas, etc making it, just the opposite. If I thought they would become stars, I would not want Gaborik traded for prospects. But since I am not sure about these players, I want more youth.

If we could get another Kreider, Thomas and Fasth for Gaborik, it would significantly increase the odds that someone in the system becomes that young scorer we need.

I think we need to add a couple of offense-minded forwards in addition to drafting 3 forwards with our first and two second rounder. Adding 5-6 high-risk, high-return forward prospects to our mix is going to set us up for the future.
So according to the 5 year maturity rule I saw earlier...would make us competitive around 2016? Almost halfway to 54 years.

NHRangerfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2011, 04:02 PM
  #214
vipernsx
Flatus Expeller
 
vipernsx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 6,530
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chosen View Post
Almost ten pages of posts and not one person has been able to tell me who is a goal scorer on the Rangers, but at least I learned that Blackburn was going to be a franchise goaltender.
I see this as half way down page 5, not 10 pages and Marion Gaborik is a pretty legit goal scorer. I'd say Ryan Callahan and Brandon Dubinsky are goal scorers of the power forward model. If we see Brad Richards signed with NYR I predict that the line will be Dubinsky - Richards - Callahan much the same as Ericksson - Richards - Neal was in Dallas and you'll see Dubinsky and Callahan score in the 30+ goal range. As far as prospects are concerned, potentially Kreider, Grachev or Fasth though hands down the one with the highest aptitude as a pure goal scorer would be Thomas.

If you're looking for the Tony Amonte 50 goal scorer, keep looking, they're few and far between. 1 guy scored over 50 this season and only 5 scored over 40. 29 scored more than 30 so if Callahan and Dubinsky score more than 30 that's 2 on this team and when there's less than 1 per team, that's pretty good and we haven't even included Gaborik yet.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/playerstats.h...ewName=summary


Last edited by vipernsx: 04-28-2011 at 04:07 PM.
vipernsx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2011, 04:07 PM
  #215
NHRangerfan
enfoonts
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: New Hampshire
Country: United States
Posts: 3,091
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupersonicMonkey View Post
No, your point still doesn't stand.

Carlson is 20, and just had his first full season in the NHL, and put up 37 points.

Del Zotto did it at 19.

AT THE MOMENT it's still pretty much a wash.
No JG is correct...you compare same seasons...last season MDZ won, this season Carlson won...lets see what each does next season.

NHRangerfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2011, 04:11 PM
  #216
NHRangerfan
enfoonts
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: New Hampshire
Country: United States
Posts: 3,091
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupersonicMonkey View Post
Del Zotto was on the NHL roster for half the season. What do you mean he couldn't crack the lineup? He played 47 games in the NHL this year.
This is what freaks me out about internet message boards the inability to give the other person credit.

MDZ was on the roster for 47 games because Torts had no other offensive option...we all watched MDZ struggle, because Torts was caught by the short ones he gave MDZ every opportunity to work through it with the big club...when it became apparent he wasn't gonna work through it they sent him to the Whale. How you can you even say that Carlson-MDZ is even close at this point.

NHRangerfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2011, 04:14 PM
  #217
Jersey Girl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,956
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupersonicMonkey View Post
Wrong again. You're the one spinning things.

You're the one that migrated the conversation from how you believe failed draft picks are exclusive the the New York Rangers, to John Carlson being leaps and bounds better then Del Zotto and your wrong on all accounts.
Where did I say Carlson is leaps and bounds better than del Zotto? Don't bother looking...you won't find it. Don't put words in my mouth.

Quote:
Del Zotto has far more upside then Carlson.
That's your opinion, and you're entitled to it. I hope you're correct.

But it's not fact.

Jersey Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2011, 04:20 PM
  #218
kovazub94
Enigmatic
 
kovazub94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,008
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SickNice View Post
Yeah but envisioning is just that, envisioning. Pavel Brendl was supposed to be a dominant first-line winger. Jamie Lundmark was supposed to be a dominant first-line center. Evgeny Grachev was supposed to be a top 6 forward (I'd be surprised if he plays more than a few games as a Ranger before he's gone). Bobby Sanguinetti, not a goal scorer, but the next Brian Leetch. Lauri Korpikoski was going to develop into a second line forward. Dane Byers a solid third-liner who could play second-line time. The list goes on.

The point is that aside from Gaborik, maybe Krieder and maybe Thomas, there isn't anyone at any level of the organization that you could say is a goal scorer.
Typical HF perspective: you completely dismissed Grachev but have Kreider and Thomas as "maybe's" in line with Gaborik.

kovazub94 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2011, 04:38 PM
  #219
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 16,293
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kovazub94 View Post
Typical HF perspective: you completely dismissed Grachev but have Kreider and Thomas as "maybe's" in line with Gaborik.
I think "typical HF perspective" is being someone that said Grachev would be a 40-40 guy in the NHL (and trust me, it was said), ignoring the fact he's struggled since juniors, and moving onto (over)hyping Kreider and Thomas.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2011, 04:59 PM
  #220
Zil
Registered User
 
Zil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 4,304
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
I think "typical HF perspective" is being someone that said Grachev would be a 40-40 guy in the NHL (and trust me, it was said), ignoring the fact he's struggled since juniors, and moving onto (over)hyping Kreider and Thomas.
There's a difference between the people who got unrealistic about Grachev and the people saying Kreider and Thomas have first-line potential. Kreider and Thomas do have first-line potential. I don't know if they'll reach it, but it certainly could happen. That said, Grachev's age 21 season in Hartford doesn't compare badly to Dubinsky's:

71 games 21 goals 22 assists 43 points for Dubi
73 games 16 goals 22 assists 38 points for Grachev

Considering how strong Grachev came on in the second half, he had a good season. All of our regular Hartford watchers seem to think pretty highly of his game. He could still develop into a big second-liner, which would be great for a third-round pick (and great for us).

Zil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2011, 05:21 PM
  #221
kovazub94
Enigmatic
 
kovazub94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,008
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
I think "typical HF perspective" is being someone that said Grachev would be a 40-40 guy in the NHL (and trust me, it was said), ignoring the fact he's struggled since juniors, and moving onto (over)hyping Kreider and Thomas.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zil
There's a difference between the people who got unrealistic about Grachev and the people saying Kreider and Thomas have first-line potential. Kreider and Thomas do have first-line potential.
Objectively, 21 year-old Grachev should still have exactly the same percentage chance to become 1st line or bust as either Thomas or Kreider.

kovazub94 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2011, 06:24 PM
  #222
SickNice
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Hoboken, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 485
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kovazub94 View Post
Typical HF perspective: you completely dismissed Grachev but have Kreider and Thomas as "maybe's" in line with Gaborik.
I am comfortable dismissing Grachev as a "goal scorer". I can't honestly make an informed guess at this time on those two guys (one way or the other). But I only listed them as maybes because I knew their names would be thrown back at me as a counter argument. And if you read the post right after mine, you'll see what I mean.

SickNice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2011, 06:31 PM
  #223
SickNice
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Hoboken, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 485
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zil View Post
You can't compare the current crop of prospects to Lundmark and Brendl. That's absurd. Those guys weren't even Sather picks. They were Neil Smith's doing. Clark didn't draft Sanguinetti, Byers, or Korpikoski. Grachev is still a good prospect. He's 21 and was a third-round pick who by all accounts played very well in Hartford this year. If the biggest thing you can hang on Clark is that a third-rounder might not pan out, then he's doing a pretty damn good job. Look at the quality of the young core we've established. Clark's picks deserve the benefit of the doubt until they don't pan out. And honestly, how many high-end goal-scoring prospects do you think any organization has? There aren't that many guys that have that kind of potential. Organizations don't have 10 each in their back pockets. It's not like none of our other prospects have scoring potential either. Horak, Fasth, Werek, Yogan, and Bourque all have offensive talent. They just don't have first-line upside.
Impressive. You missed the entire point of the argument and then proved it yourself! Who drafted the guys I mentioned has nothing to do with this whatsoever. The point is that they were prospects that people, as usual, over-hyped on the boards and they never materialized. It has nothing to do with who drafted them. Nothing. The argument you are making is that over-hyping them is justified because someone else picked them. I mean really? And then, you prove the very point by listing the crop of prospects that you did. None of those guys, or best case, one of them, are likely to emerge as goal scorers - let alone offensive players. This is exactly the type of hype that comes in all the time. Thanks for making my point.

SickNice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2011, 06:55 PM
  #224
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,230
vCash: 500
Not worth my time


Last edited by SupersonicMonkey*: 04-28-2011 at 07:08 PM.
SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2011, 07:00 PM
  #225
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,230
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NHRangerfan View Post
This is what freaks me out about internet message boards the inability to give the other person credit.

MDZ was on the roster for 47 games because Torts had no other offensive option...we all watched MDZ struggle, because Torts was caught by the short ones he gave MDZ every opportunity to work through it with the big club...when it became apparent he wasn't gonna work through it they sent him to the Whale. How you can you even say that Carlson-MDZ is even close at this point.
Del Zotto couldn't crack the lineup. That was the statement. Yet he played nearly 50 games.

Credit?

Del Zotto scored 37 as a 19 year old.

Carlson as a 20 year old.

Get back to me in a few years.

SupersonicMonkey* 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 12:26 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.