When the Rangers can go out and get the most physically dominant force in the NHL, then we can be the Bruins. There's only one model that can be centered around a monster.
When the Rangers can go out and get the most physically dominant force in the NHL, then we can be the Bruins. There's only one model that can be centered around a monster.
Physicality is going away. Its yesterday hockey. First head shots, then boarding, then late hits, then fights, then the rest. Sport needs to be sold to US consumers. That's the reality.
Frankly I'm sick and tired of being a hard working grind it out team full of 3rd liners. I'd rather have a real top line full of lazy snipers. Dumping the puck in and forecheking all game does nothing for you if you don't have the skating and stick skills to work it into the slot and score. The Bruins only got to where they are because TT stood on his head for the entire season. We if anything need to follow the Red Wings model. But that of course requires an owner who genuinely cares about his team.
Dubinsky and Callahan still 3rd liners in your eyes? Both were on track for 60 points this season minus the time missed due to injuries, Callahan was on pace for 30 goals or so. Just because they bang, and cycle, and grind, and do most of their play below the hash marks, doesn't mean they're not suited to be Top 6 forwards. Would you prefer the Zherdev types? Who only play good hockey in small stretches, and show little heart & intensity when it matters most?
The Red Wings model right now constitutes 11 players on their roster over the age of 30. Seven of which are 35 or older. Is that really what you want?
Physicality is going away. Its yesterday hockey. First head shots, then boarding, then late hits, then fights, then the rest. Sport needs to be sold to US consumers. That's the reality.
The people who watch NASCAR because they like the crashes and the NFL which is by far the most violent legal activity known to man? Way to go Bettman!
Julien is part of the Bruins model. His ability to run a system and integrate kids while getting an entire team to buy into his schemes is badly underrated by Bruins fans, much less the rest of the league.
Seguin is only 19 and didn't have a great year, and the 4th line was a strength of the team so breaking it up is ill-advised. Yeah you could probably find a couple guys you'd want to sit for him if you looked at individual players in a vacuum, but for the most part our lines are clicking in the playoffs, so we haven't really had an opportunity to need to think about playing the guy.
Also I agree with Julien that the kid is just a little too raw for playoff duty unless you're desperate which we aren't. I'd play Jordan Caron over Seguin personally, from an effort perspective if for no other reason.
As for the Bruins model, here's what I see Chiarelli going after in order of significance:
1: Dominant talent in net, as good as you can get
2: Great first pairing D
3: Depth at center. The Bruins exploded into relevance when Krejci joined Savard and Bergeron. Peverley (and Wheeler before the trade) provided adequate coverage of center after the Savard injury. And of course we have Seguin in development. The result is that while any one center isn't great, we're 4 men deep in centers that are good enough to play up a line (remember, Krejci was NOT Plan A as the first line center, that was Savard
4: High-effort forwards in general. Chia has drawn a fair bit of fire for things like preferring Krejci to Kessel and Peverley to Wheeler, but the results speak for themselves -- they've made the Bruins a lot better at transition, which is the key complement to a trap system to make it sufficiently dynamic to create good offense.
5: Puckmoving on D. This is an area Chia had to learn about the hard way. "God defense" isn't just about stopping the puck in the defensive zone. A trap system cannot be built with tanks in the middle pairings. You have to have players who can skate defensively if you fill your roster with guys who defend at wing. The result when done perfectly is 5 guys on the ice that play in all 3 zones. That's the reasoning behind ultimately swapping out Wideman, who was a nice puckmover but not very mobile, for ultimately Kaberle. It's also why the Bruins have Ference, who is an underrated B option as a puckmover and transition defenseman (at least when healthy) and why the Bruins had Kampfer featured so prominently in the Bruins pairings despite being a rookie defenseman before he got concussed.
Combine those 5 elements, and that's your key to success in modern hockey. Forwards who defend, defensemen who skate and chip in offensively, depth at center rather than obsessing about the top line, a good first pairing shutdown defenseman and all the goaltending smart money can buy.
I'll say this much. I never understood why Sather didn't sign Chara or Savard in 2006.
He goes out every year and signs people to multi-year deals, but decides to sit out Chara then, don't get why.
I'll say this much. I never understood why Sather didn't sign Chara or Savard in 2006.
He goes out every year and signs people to multi-year deals, but decides to sit out Chara then, don't get why.
I've heard rumors/speculation that Chara had no interest in signing with the Rangers... Can't assume it's the right fit for every high profile FA....
I never heard, that Chara wouldn't sign with the Rangers (even though he is massively overrated, he is NOT a Norris caliber defenseman) he still would have been better than any other long term FA we did get.
Can not think of why he would say he would not sign here, never heard any FA say that about the Rangers, can't see him saying it as well.
Bergeron had 57 points this past season. Krecji led the team with 62. The hope here is that Anisimov and perhaps Stepan can become similar point producers. And who knows with Richards.
Both players also had 70+ seasons. Horton and Lucic are also not slouches either. And Chara; we don't have anything close to Chara. As good as Staal is defensively, Chara's passing and shooting on the PP... well just ask Callahan and Drury's broken hands. or was it Girardi's ankle? Anyways, Staal is not gonna find a howitzer like that out of nowhere. Marchand is as promising of a rookie as Dubinsky ever was. Minus a few inches. Recchi and Ryder were good depth scorers. Peverley has had his share of success. They also have the Seguin kid who's just riding the pine. A lot needs to happen for our talent pool to catch up. A healthy and successful Gaborik immediately helps but Boston also had Savard before he went down.
I never heard, that Chara wouldn't sign with the Rangers (even though he is massively overrated, he is NOT a Norris caliber defenseman) he still would have been better than any other long term FA we did get.
Can not think of why he would say he would not sign here, never heard any FA say that about the Rangers, can't see him saying it as well.
In watched the Bruins the past couple of seasons, I starting thinking that this is a model that the Rangers could follow. As Tortorella said, they are never going to be able to build like the Caps or Pens did with top 10 picks for a few seasons in a row.
The Bruins are built from the back of the ice. Solid goaltending. Their best player leads a strong defense. And a group of forwards that are good, but not great. Their top line is Lucic Krejci and Horton. The rest of the forward group is filled by guys like Bergeron and Mark Recchi, Michael Ryder, etc.
I think the Rangers can become what the Bruins are. A solid 100 point team that has the potential to challenge for the Cup. They have the goaltender and a strong, young defense. Their forwards are good, hard working guys with some skills, who are also young and hopefully getting better.
I think it's a good model to follow, just without the whole choking up in tight spots in the playoffs.
The biggest thing that makes the Bruins good (no pun intended) is Zdeno Chara. When you can sic a guy like that on the opposing top line, it helps you out by a mile.
Lucky for the Ottawa Senators, they chose to keep Redden over Chara. Whoops.
Lucky for the Rangers, they didn't learn from Ottawa's mistake and signed Redden to be their version of Chara (at least based on salary). Double whoops.
One guy I do like in the Bruins system that may become available is Valabik. Another big tough shut down defenseman (but one who needs to be coached to take less penalties...reminds me a little of a young Chara). But with McIlrath in the system he may be redundant.
We are already a similar team to the Bruins. While they are a team that can somewhat score, they have to play a game like ours because they don't have much skill. They desperately need a true sniper if they ever want to be an elite team.
Milan Lucic - David Krejci - Nathan Horton
Brad Marchand - Patrice Bergeron - Mark Recchi
Rich Peverley - Chris Kelly - Michael Ryder
Daniel Paille - Gregory Campbell - Shawn Thornton
Zdeno Chara - Johnny Boychuk
Dennis Seidenberg - Tomas Kaberle
Andrew Ference - Adam McQuaid
Tim Thomas
Tuukka Rask
___________ - Brad Richards* - Marian Gaborik
Brandon Dubinsky - Artem Anisimov - Ryan Callahan
Wojtek Wolski - Derek Stepan - Mats Zuccarello
___________ - Brian Boyle - Brandon Prust
Marc Staal - Dan Girardi
Ryan McDonagh - Michael Sauer
__________ - Michael Del Zotto
Henrik Lundqvist
Martin Biron
If the Bruins didn't get lucky this year with Tim Thomas, and they were very lucky because he'll never be able to come close to what he did again, then they'd have the same amount of points as us. Likewise, if we had a little bit more lucky on our side, we'd have a few more games in hand.
Lucky with Thomas? This is the second time in 3 years he's displayed Vezina trophy type play. How is that remotely luck?
Incidentally seguin while a disappontment to me is still only 19 and capable of becoming Boston's top skill player by say 2012-2013. Boston is set up right now
to contest with Pittsburgh for the next year or two for EC dominance.
Boston has overcome the loss of their top skill center, so they have proven they
have quite a bit of depth. They also lead the NHL in 5 on 5 goal differential which many people overlook.
Dubinsky and Callahan still 3rd liners in your eyes? Both were on track for 60 points this season minus the time missed due to injuries, Callahan was on pace for 30 goals or so. Just because they bang, and cycle, and grind, and do most of their play below the hash marks, doesn't mean they're not suited to be Top 6 forwards. Would you prefer the Zherdev types? Who only play good hockey in small stretches, and show little heart & intensity when it matters most?
The Red Wings model right now constitutes 11 players on their roster over the age of 30. Seven of which are 35 or older. Is that really what you want?
This is really an intellectually dishonest post. Detriot won the SC just three years ago
with that model. What do you expect them to do throw away some of their best assets?
Lidstrom had an excellent year and Rafalski is still an effective player. Are you trying to tell me you wouldn't take them on Boston?
In watched the Bruins the past couple of seasons, I starting thinking that this is a model that the Rangers could follow. As Tortorella said, they are never going to be able to build like the Caps or Pens did with top 10 picks for a few seasons in a row.
The Bruins are built from the back of the ice. Solid goaltending. Their best player leads a strong defense. And a group of forwards that are good, but not great. Their top line is Lucic Krejci and Horton. The rest of the forward group is filled by guys like Bergeron and Mark Recchi, Michael Ryder, etc.
I think the Rangers can become what the Bruins are. A solid 100 point team that has the potential to challenge for the Cup. They have the goaltender and a strong, young defense. Their forwards are good, hard working guys with some skills, who are also young and hopefully getting better.
I think it's a good model to follow, just without the whole choking up in tight spots in the playoffs.
I agree.. Good post..
Also, there really is not much separating this Ranger team to the Bruins.
Both teams have real good goalies
Both teams have a strong defense
Both teams are comparable on offense. (Boston scored only 13 more goals than the Rangers all season)
I never heard, that Chara wouldn't sign with the Rangers (even though he is massively overrated, he is NOT a Norris caliber defenseman) he still would have been better than any other long term FA we did get.
Can not think of why he would say he would not sign here, never heard any FA say that about the Rangers, can't see him saying it as well.
Chara's agent immediately notified the Rangers on July 1st that his client (Chara) was not interested in playing for the NYR. The Rangers had interest.
Another player a Rangers made a strong pitch to, but "missed out" on was Patrick Elias.
Maybe it's just me, but I'd hesitate to model my team after another one if they have yet to win a Cup. We'll see what happens with Boston in the next month.
What it comes down to, as it always does, is having an eye for talent throughout the draft, making smart trades, and signing the right free agents. The first and third ones have been a bit of an issue for Sather.
Also, there really is not much separating this Ranger team to the Bruins.
Both teams have real good goalies
Both teams have a strong defense
Both teams are comparable on offense. (Boston scored only 13 more goals than the Rangers all season)
Thank you. It just seems the logical way to form this Ranger team. Crosby, Ovechkin, Stamkos, etc. are not going to be drafted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OverTheCap
Maybe it's just me, but I'd hesitate to model my team after another one if they have yet to win a Cup. We'll see what happens with Boston in the next month.
What it comes down to, as it always does, is having an eye for talent throughout the draft, making smart trades, and signing the right free agents. The first and third ones have been a bit of an issue for Sather.
That's part of the whole building process. We'll see if the Bruins learned anything from last year. But they are consistent 100 point team and a boarder line conf. finals team the last 3 seasons, including this one.
