HFBoards

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

PK unit

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-14-2004, 12:13 PM
  #1
dumpsathernow*
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 612
vCash: 500
PK unit

Anybody have an idea on what will be done with this unit. I've given up trying to figure out what they are doing. With all the money this organization has it is so hard to bring in at the least a top PK coach? I mean, we get hammered every year on the PK.

Maybe with Betts, Ortmeyer and perhaps with Wiseman, Murray and dare I say Lundmark we actually have some willing penalty killers on this roster. I've never seen a team let up so many point shots with screens in front. Mind boggling.

dumpsathernow* is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 12:19 PM
  #2
Prucha73
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,879
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by yagerasdom
Anybody have an idea on what will be done with this unit. I've given up trying to figure out what they are doing. With all the money this organization has it is so hard to bring in at the least a top PK coach? I mean, we get hammered every year on the PK.

Maybe with Betts, Ortmeyer and perhaps with Wiseman, Murray and dare I say Lundmark we actually have some willing penalty killers on this roster. I've never seen a team let up so many point shots with screens in front. Mind boggling.
Balej with his speed will probably get to play PK also I think Moore and Murray are good choices.

Prucha73 is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 12:19 PM
  #3
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 20,919
vCash: 500
I don't see...

five rookies being on the Rangers PK team. I'm not even sure if Betts is NHL-ready, nor do I believe Murray was a big PKer in Hartford, much less New York. Ditto Wiseman - not 100% sure if he was a penalty killer. Ortmeyer may turn out to be a decent PKer. He hustled a lot last season and was a willing shotblocker. He was often out of position, as were most Rangers, although I believe Mess was instrumental in helping him out there. Lundmark's decent because of his speed, but he too sometimes over-commits and is fooled a lot, but I think he can learn to be better.

But what it's going to take is a coach that'll stay on top of these guys and hammer home the importance of positioning - as well as staying away from double-teaming players, which leaves a 4-on-2 situation elsewhere on the ice. And finally, a defenseman that can dish it out in front of the net. The Rangers had zero presence there. Everybody likes to pick on Poti there, but Leetch, Malakhov, Mironov, Purinton, et al, were no better in front of the Rangers net, and all, especially Leetch, wandered about the ice. That needs to be corrected.

Fletch is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 12:23 PM
  #4
jas
Unsatisfied
 
jas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 12,978
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch
five rookies being on the Rangers PK team. I'm not even sure if Betts is NHL-ready, nor do I believe Murray was a big PKer in Hartford, much less New York. Ditto Wiseman - not 100% sure if he was a penalty killer. Ortmeyer may turn out to be a decent PKer. He hustled a lot last season and was a willing shotblocker. He was often out of position, as were most Rangers, although I believe Mess was instrumental in helping him out there. Lundmark's decent because of his speed, but he too sometimes over-commits and is fooled a lot, but I think he can learn to be better.

But what it's going to take is a coach that'll stay on top of these guys and hammer home the importance of positioning - as well as staying away from double-teaming players, which leaves a 4-on-2 situation elsewhere on the ice. And finally, a defenseman that can dish it out in front of the net. The Rangers had zero presence there. Everybody likes to pick on Poti there, but Leetch, Malakhov, Mironov, Purinton, et al, were no better in front of the Rangers net, and all, especially Leetch, wandered about the ice. That needs to be corrected.
I'm curious, Fletch, why you're not sure if Betts is ready? He made Calgary last year, and that was a SCup finalist. On a team so riddled with holes, I would think he has a VERY good chance to be on the roster in December.

jas is online now  
Old
07-14-2004, 12:33 PM
  #5
NYR469
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 5,785
vCash: 500
the one major change will be the addition of some young legs...that should allow them to put more pressure on the puck since the kids won't just stand around like the lazy vets we've had in the past

NYR469 is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 12:38 PM
  #6
Balej20*
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 11,045
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch
five rookies being on the Rangers PK team. I'm not even sure if Betts is NHL-ready
Betts is NHL ready, he's been playing in the NHL. He was hurt last year when we got him, thats why he didnt step right in.

Balej20* is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 12:52 PM
  #7
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 20,919
vCash: 500
Don't know much about him...

so that's why I said 'I don't know'. I also can't say if he's a penalty killer because, again, I don't know much about him except he's 24 and scored 3 points in 20 games with Calgary this past season. I think I was generally frustrated because I looked at a proposed list of penalty killers that consisted of inexperienced youth and my initial thought was the list was developed with the primary thought of these guys are young, have legs, and most surely will be effective penalty killers, which is an approach with which I don't agree. If that wasn't the case, then I'm outta line...

Fletch is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 12:58 PM
  #8
Forechecker
Registered User
 
Forechecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Country: Netherlands
Posts: 4,322
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Forechecker
I'll say one thing, I would rather have a PK break down b/c of overly aggressive youngsters gunning for the puck, rather than a bunch of tired old men who are too lazy to get into position.

Forechecker is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 01:02 PM
  #9
Balej20*
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 11,045
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forechecker
I'll say one thing, I would rather have a PK break down b/c of overly aggressive youngsters gunning for the puck, rather than a bunch of tired old men who are too lazy to get into position.
I'll agree with that. Remember when we had Bure, and we threw him on the PK. He was a threat to score a shorty EVERY single time he was on the ice. The PK was actually exciting to watch...although we still sucked. Ortmyer will definately be on the PK, and we have a few other youngsters who will be used on the PK.

I heard Lundmark wont be used on the PK as he was last year. This will free up better ice time for him.

Balej20* is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 01:14 PM
  #10
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 20,919
vCash: 500
Forechecker...

the results the same. But I don't think last season's woes were a result of lazy vets. It was just fundamentally not sound. Too often the players were out of position, and not because of laziness, but because they didn't know where to be. And the yoots were probably worse than the vets in picking up the guy going to the net.

Balej - what does 'free up better ice time' mean for Lundmark? If he's not on the PK, a responsibility is taken away from him and with the Rangers' undisciplined play, his flow diminishes as a result. I think the PK wil help his confidence. But if he's not on it, I'm not sure why he would get more ice time and responsibility elsewhere. He should be in shape for 15-17+ minutes per game, which would include PK time. Taking the PK away from him shows a lack of confidence in him and Jamie, I don't think, can handle much more of that.

Fletch is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 01:25 PM
  #11
NYR469
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 5,785
vCash: 500
another thing that can be done to improve the pk is simply to stay out of the box and be more discipline...with the kids we should hopefully see far less 'lazy' penalties but in recent years we've been one of the most penalized teams in the league and no matter how good your pk is if you give the other team 7-8 chances a night they will eventually score...

NYR469 is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 01:32 PM
  #12
Blueshirt13
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Other side of the Ri
Posts: 758
vCash: 500
I think Holik, Ortmeyer and Murray might be on the PK as all do get infront of shots. Holik uses his body and isn't afraid to throw someone out of the way who is screening. Ortmeyer gives his all and gets infront of shots. Murray looked pretty good on the PK in Hartford.

Fourth PK forward? Maybe one of the FA centers we bring in? I don't know.

I'm more worried about who we have on D for the PK. As of right now, there isn't anyone who will move someone away from Dunham.

Blueshirt13 is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 01:32 PM
  #13
dumpsathernow*
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 612
vCash: 500
"I'll say one thing, I would rather have a PK break down b/c of overly aggressive youngsters gunning for the puck, rather than a bunch of tired old men who are too lazy to get into position."

Amen

Did anybody else notice that Fedor, Lampman and Ortmeyer came up and didn't take one stupid penalty after another? Perhaps that was because they actually were coached well. All the more reason we need to promote coaches from our AHL team. We let one get away and he won a cup. Hopefully, stupid Renney is a 1 year and out guy.

dumpsathernow* is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 01:42 PM
  #14
barnaby63
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Long Island
Posts: 860
vCash: 500
PK 1:
C - Dominic Moore
W - Jed Ortmeyer
D - Fedor Tyutin
D - Darius Kasparaitis

PK 2:
C - Blair Betts
W - Garth Murray
D - Maxim Kondratiev
D - Dan McGillis

barnaby63 is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 01:54 PM
  #15
Fish
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: New Zealand
Posts: 2,177
vCash: 500
The problem I think the Rangers will have most on the penalty kill will be finding a centerman who can kill penalties. On the roster at the moment they really only have three centermen with NHL experience (Holik, Lundmark and Betts), Holik is not known for his face-off ability in the defensive zone, Lundmark has been sub-par in the face-off circle and Betts is coming off an injury.

I think the most likely scenario is that all three will see some PK duty at this stage and we could likely see all sorts of pairings as the Rangers search for some solutions. I think intuitively Balej, Wiseman and Murray aren't players you'd currently consider as strong defensive players, but I don't know that that would necessarily preclude them from being used.

It would not be surprising to see Jagr and Balej used to keep the defenseman honest by perhaps a counter-attack option, particularly for face-offs in the offensive zone.

On defense I think you'll see a lot of reliance on Poti, Rachunek and Kasparaitis as the veterans with the younger players given the opportunity to make their mark.

Fish is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 04:13 PM
  #16
little a from da bx
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 375
vCash: 500
all i know is that tyutin, murray and ortmeyer better be on ... who else i dont know yet, and forbetts 3 shoulder surgeries in 2 yaers or something like that i would say get rid of him for a 5th rounder or something and give his spot to corey larose, hes a bit older but liked what i saw in those couple games he was with us.

little a from da bx is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 04:43 PM
  #17
Balej20*
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 11,045
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch
the results the same. But I don't think last season's woes were a result of lazy vets. It was just fundamentally not sound. Too often the players were out of position, and not because of laziness, but because they didn't know where to be. And the yoots were probably worse than the vets in picking up the guy going to the net.

Balej - what does 'free up better ice time' mean for Lundmark? If he's not on the PK, a responsibility is taken away from him and with the Rangers' undisciplined play, his flow diminishes as a result. I think the PK wil help his confidence. But if he's not on it, I'm not sure why he would get more ice time and responsibility elsewhere. He should be in shape for 15-17+ minutes per game, which would include PK time. Taking the PK away from him shows a lack of confidence in him and Jamie, I don't think, can handle much more of that.
When they gave him PK time last year, it was a cover up so they can say he is getting more ice time. It was a joke, he's not gonna put up numbers on the PK, and then go out and play on the 4th line. I'd rather see him on the PP and on the 2nd line getting 17 minutes a game. Rather than 17 minutes a game on the 2nd or 3rd line and the PK unit. Dont you agree?

Balej20* is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 05:07 PM
  #18
dumpsathernow*
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 612
vCash: 500
Either way it's a good bet Lundmark will stink or be traded before the season starts.

dumpsathernow* is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 06:59 PM
  #19
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 20,919
vCash: 500
That's not happening, Balej....

there was no cover-up. They gave him more responsibility as they tried to groom him further, and that should've been looked as a positive regardless of what was happening with his ES and PP ice time. The kid will still need to earn time. Again, while everybody will say he was screwed, I will continue to be disappointed in his performance this past season. He's going to be 24 years old, I believe, shortly. He's gotta bring his A game and play. I'm not feeling sorry for him one bit, nor will I say he's being screwed, nor will I say that he deserves squat.

Fletch is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 07:45 PM
  #20
Balej20*
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 11,045
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch
there was no cover-up. They gave him more responsibility as they tried to groom him further, and that should've been looked as a positive regardless of what was happening with his ES and PP ice time. The kid will still need to earn time. Again, while everybody will say he was screwed, I will continue to be disappointed in his performance this past season. He's going to be 24 years old, I believe, shortly. He's gotta bring his A game and play. I'm not feeling sorry for him one bit, nor will I say he's being screwed, nor will I say that he deserves squat.
You know, you make a good point. Im a strong believer in earning your time. But the time is gonna be earned in training camp. Or else ice time will be rewarded for seniority, and he happens to be senior on this young team.

Balej20* is offline  
Closed Thread

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 05:22 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.