HFBoards

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

Brad Richards News Part II

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-15-2011, 06:36 PM
  #176
dedalus
Registered User
 
dedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,215
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinehead View Post
Now compare this to Holmstrom and Franzen who are considered to be two of the best at deflecting and potting garbage in front. They also scored 10 PP goals each, Holmstrom playing 13 more games than Callahan, Franzen 16, with Lidstrom at the point and Datsyuk setting up. Put Cally with Datsyuk and Lidstrom, and have him play 13-16 more games, and he has way more than 10 powerplay goals.
It will be interesting to see if he's on the first unit this year ... and vital to his production, IMO.

dedalus is offline  
Old
05-15-2011, 06:43 PM
  #177
BlueshirtBlitz
Rich Nash
 
BlueshirtBlitz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New York
Posts: 17,619
vCash: 500
Its going to be an interesting season, that's for sure. It's the first time I'm levying hefty expectations on the homegrown core and ill be upset if they don't reach it. It can definitely go either way.

BlueshirtBlitz is offline  
Old
05-15-2011, 06:48 PM
  #178
BrianBoyle
Nash goes HAM
 
BrianBoyle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: On the grass
Country: United States
Posts: 51,728
vCash: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by dedalus View Post
That's fair but it won't offset the loss of premium ice time, especially PP time, and since top defense pairing in this league go at about 24 minutes per night, the Rangers' second line will see be seeing them.
Thing is, they won't be seeing them primarily, though. Most of the time, they'll be out against 2nd and 3rd pairing guys, and I think that'll help their production. Sheltered minutes are sometimes a godsend for 2nd lines.

Quote:
I'd say the mix of forwards they see will play a role in that because that's likely to change, too. But we'll see. Losing 2-3 minutes a night over the course of the season, I'd say they'll be fortunate to maintain the same numbers, even while likely seeing more of second pairings.
I expect to see a consistent line of 50-55 points a piece for each of those players, provided we get Richards. They're certainly all capable of that mark, but it's still an unknown, as only Dubinsky has hit 50 points of the 3.

Quote:
True. Obviously I agree with your position that they're not "potent." They weren't potent as a first line, and I don't see them being potent as a second line either, not unless you can add another high-talent, high-scoring forward to their line in order to elevate their games.
I agree. I think they will be solid second line, that has the potential to be considered "potent", but as of now, potential is exactly that.

__________________

Neutral Milk Hotel are literally GOAT
Amy Poehler <3

Credit to Ail for the sig.
BrianBoyle is online now  
Old
05-15-2011, 07:19 PM
  #179
RangerFan10
Registered User
 
RangerFan10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Long Island/Plattsbu
Country: United States
Posts: 5,328
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to RangerFan10
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR94 View Post
Nope, it's not old at all.

But how long is he going to want to sign for and how old will he be towards the end of the deal? And will he still be productive?

The Rangers hand out a lot of money for "today" without much concern for what the future may hold in terms of aging and a decline in productivity, however steep that may be. 5-6 years is a long time and a big investment. For how many of those years will he be a first line center? It's a big risk for a team that is multiple pieces away from being a serious contender.

I'm not worried about 31 year old Brad Richards. The Rangers could have used him against Washington. It's what he'll be when the Rangers are still devoting a hefty cap hit to him in the later years of his contract that could be a problem.
When yous ay "multiple" how many do you exactly see? Top 5 goaltender, shutdown defenseman, good partner to supplement him, good defensive depth, young leadership and IMO "winners" in guys like Stepan, Callahan and Dubinsky

RangerFan10 is offline  
Old
05-15-2011, 07:45 PM
  #180
Clowes Line
Cally's Chicken Parm
 
Clowes Line's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New Yawk
Country: United States
Posts: 12,544
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Mastrosimone View Post
Thing is, they won't be seeing them primarily, though. Most of the time, they'll be out against 2nd and 3rd pairing guys, and I think that'll help their production. Sheltered minutes are sometimes a godsend for 2nd lines.



I expect to see a consistent line of 50-55 points a piece for each of those players, provided we get Richards. They're certainly all capable of that mark, but it's still an unknown, as only Dubinsky has hit 50 points of the 3.



I agree. I think they will be solid second line, that has the potential to be considered "potent", but as of now, potential is exactly that.
Yea but Callahan was the more consistent player and had 48 points and missed 22 games. If he plays all 82, Callahan definitely gets 60 points IMO

__________________
Jaime Lannister has better hands than Brian Boyle.
Clowes Line is offline  
Old
05-15-2011, 07:52 PM
  #181
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 13,398
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HagelinForPresident View Post
Yea but Callahan was the more consistent player and had 48 points and missed 22 games. If he plays all 82, Callahan definitely gets 60 points IMO
Its all relative. Callahan's style of play makes it difficult for him to play a full 82 games each year. Its that style that makes him a second line player, because lets be honest, hes not the most skillful guy in the world.

And if you tug on the reigns a bit to keep him healthy, it very well might hurt his production.

Bleed Ranger Blue is online now  
Old
05-15-2011, 07:55 PM
  #182
New York RKY
Moderator
Let's Go Rangers!
 
New York RKY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Dirty Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 11,982
vCash: 500
How exactly does any of this have to do with Richards?

__________________
New York RKY is offline  
Old
05-15-2011, 07:56 PM
  #183
BrianBoyle
Nash goes HAM
 
BrianBoyle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: On the grass
Country: United States
Posts: 51,728
vCash: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by I Love Rebecca Black View Post
How exactly does any of this have to do with Richards?
We're discussing whether the offense with Richards is "potent" or not.

BrianBoyle is online now  
Old
05-15-2011, 07:59 PM
  #184
New York RKY
Moderator
Let's Go Rangers!
 
New York RKY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Dirty Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 11,982
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Mastrosimone View Post
We're discussing whether the offense with Richards is "potent" or not.
I think it has become more of a "is Callahan and Dubinsky 60 point players" discussion

New York RKY is offline  
Old
05-15-2011, 08:03 PM
  #185
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 13,398
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I Love Rebecca Black View Post
I think it has become more of a "is Callahan and Dubinsky 60 point players" discussion
You can have this type of conversation about anyone in the lineup when considering Richards' presence.

His inclusion on the roster would mean that much.

Bleed Ranger Blue is online now  
Old
05-15-2011, 08:08 PM
  #186
BlueshirtBlitz
Rich Nash
 
BlueshirtBlitz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New York
Posts: 17,619
vCash: 500
Why do we keep using quotes around potent?

Either way yeah, I guess it's the argument that Richards makes this team a top team in the east, and it can also be taken as "Richards makes EVERYONE better."

BlueshirtBlitz is offline  
Old
05-15-2011, 08:10 PM
  #187
New York RKY
Moderator
Let's Go Rangers!
 
New York RKY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Dirty Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 11,982
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
You can have this type of conversation about anyone in the lineup when considering Richards' presence.

His inclusion on the roster would mean that much.
We'll that's a pretty obvious statement imo.

He is a former 80+ point player, Conne Symthe Winner, Stanley Cup Winner, etc.

He is an ELITE playmaker that is also a great leader/mentor.

I really didn't think the inclusion of Richards in this lineup and the effect it would have on our current group was really up for debate.

Richards would CLEARLY make our entire team better. I just kinda assumed it was a given however.

New York RKY is offline  
Old
05-15-2011, 08:11 PM
  #188
BlueshirtBlitz
Rich Nash
 
BlueshirtBlitz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New York
Posts: 17,619
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I Love Rebecca Black View Post
We'll that's a pretty obvious statement imo.

He is a former 80+ point player, Conne Symthe Winner, Stanley Cup Winner, etc.

He is an ELITE playmaker that is also a great leader/mentor.

I really didn't think the inclusion of Richards in this lineup and the effect it would have on our current group was really up for debate.

Richards would CLEARLY make our entire team better. I just kinda assumed it was a given however.
Tell that to the "30 years old? OH HELL NO." crowd.

BlueshirtBlitz is offline  
Old
05-15-2011, 08:15 PM
  #189
New York RKY
Moderator
Let's Go Rangers!
 
New York RKY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Dirty Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 11,982
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueshirtBlitz View Post
Tell that to the "30 years old? OH HELL NO." crowd.
I don't even think the people who are in the he's too old crowd are debating the amazing things he can bring to this team.

Their difference of opinions comes in when we start talking about Richards 4-5 years down the road.

People who are for the Richards signing believe that he is so clearly above and beyond Drury and Gomez that his skills won't decline that noticeably. The people against signing Richards are using foresight to predict Richards skills deteriorating to such a point where it is yet another albatross contract.

New York RKY is offline  
Old
05-15-2011, 08:29 PM
  #190
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 13,398
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I Love Rebecca Black View Post
I don't even think the people who are in the he's too old crowd are debating the amazing things he can bring to this team.

Their difference of opinions comes in when we start talking about Richards 4-5 years down the road.

People who are for the Richards signing believe that he is so clearly above and beyond Drury and Gomez that his skills won't decline that noticeably. The people against signing Richards are using foresight to predict Richards skills deteriorating to such a point where it is yet another albatross contract.
First of all, if Richards signs for 5+ years (he will), I dont think anyone at all is saying his skills "wont decline noticeably"....I do think, at 35-36 years old, he can still put up 60+ points and be a top 6 contributor, making his cap hit far from a killer.

But, more importantly, the issue here is that too many people seem to think things are so clearly on the up and up with young players/prospects, that its even important to look 5-6-7 years down the road at this point. Its not. The pipeline is far from a sure thing and its silly to incorporate their potential success into any plans right now.

This team's window lasts as long as Lundqvist's window lasts. Hes far and away the best player on the team to the point where its not even really close - and he just turned 29.

Considering what generally happens to goaltenders' performance as they creep into their mid 30's, I give this core a 4 or 5 year window, tops. Brad Richards will give you that many years of very good to excellent hockey, and that makes it an even wiser investment.

Bleed Ranger Blue is online now  
Old
05-15-2011, 08:36 PM
  #191
New York RKY
Moderator
Let's Go Rangers!
 
New York RKY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Dirty Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 11,982
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
First of all, if Richards signs for 5+ years (he will), I dont think anyone at all is saying his skills "wont decline noticeably"....I do think, at 35-36 years old, he can still put up 60+ points and be a top 6 contributor, making his cap hit far from a killer.

But, more importantly, the issue here is that too many people seem to think things are so clearly on the up and up with young players/prospects, that its even important to look 5-6-7 years down the road at this point. Its not. The pipeline is far from a sure thing and its silly to incorporate their potential success into any plans right now.

This team's window lasts as long as Lundqvist's window lasts. Hes far and away the best player on the team to the point where its not even really close - and he just turned 29.

Considering what generally happens to goaltenders' performance as they creep into their mid 30's, I give this core a 4 or 5 year window, tops. Brad Richards will give you that many years of very good to excellent hockey, and that makes it an even wiser investment.
First of all, I agree that Richards is a great signing and have been advocating it for basically a year now.

Secondly I do think that that is where the line is drawn between the for and against groups.

While most of us agree our window is 5-6 years, the people who are against signing Richards worry that After those 5-6 years his contract will be a killer.

I don't feel that way because as I mentioned he is so far and above the Drury's and Gomez's of the world that even in his later years he could still be a 50-60 point player, but other people don't see it like that.

New York RKY is offline  
Old
05-15-2011, 08:45 PM
  #192
Machinehead
Richards Supporter
 
Machinehead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: New York New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,484
vCash: 500
We even have to debate this? Pretty much every offense outside of Florida and Ottawa is potent with Richards.

Machinehead is offline  
Old
05-15-2011, 09:02 PM
  #193
Clowes Line
Cally's Chicken Parm
 
Clowes Line's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New Yawk
Country: United States
Posts: 12,544
vCash: 500
I just can't stop thinking about a power play unit of

Callahan-Kreider-Dubinsky (Duby would take the face-offs obviously, not Kreider, but then he would go to wing and play on the board with Kreider in front of the net)

Richards-Gaborik

Clowes Line is offline  
Old
05-15-2011, 09:25 PM
  #194
mcsauer2738
Registered User
 
mcsauer2738's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,012
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HagelinForPresident View Post
I just can't stop thinking about a power play unit of

Callahan-Kreider-Dubinsky (Duby would take the face-offs obviously, not Kreider, but then he would go to wing and play on the board with Kreider in front of the net)

Richards-Gaborik
no way am i comfortable with 5 forwards running the pp. I know some teams do it but I personally am not comfortable with it

mcsauer2738 is offline  
Old
05-15-2011, 09:39 PM
  #195
nyr2k2
Can't Beat Him
 
nyr2k2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 22,327
vCash: 500
Awards:
Well, what is potent?

The Rangers scored 224 goals last season, excluding the "goals" we're credited for when winning the SO. An average of 2.73, which was good for 16th in the league.

Let's assume Brad Richards himself adds a net of 10 goals over the center production we received this season--with Anisimov, Stepan, and Christensen taking turns as the top center. And let's optimistically project that Gaborik returns to form, and scores 35 goals (an additional 13 over his total from last year). IMO, reasonable, realistic production. And then we'll assume that the net output of all of the other players remains exactly the same.

That puts us at 247 goals, or an average of 3.01 goals per game. That would place us fifth in the league. That's pretty potent, in my humble opinion.

Now, there's obviously other factors to consider--reduced ice time/PP time for other players could result in a drop in their production, for one. But even if we only see a net increase of half of what I predicted, say 12 goals, we're still talking a jump into the fringes of the top ten. That's good, considering we're solid defensively and have elite goaltending.

Obviously, the biggest issue with the offense is consistency-- on some days, we're competent, bordering on noteworthy; on others, we're horrendous. Hopefully, adding a legitimate center and a rejuvenated Gaborik would do wonders for line stability and establishing roles, which in turn could lead to more consistent production.

Will all it happen? Will those projections pan out if we add Richards? I don't know. My point is that we shouldn't be that far from being considered a "good" offensive team.

__________________

It's just pain.
nyr2k2 is offline  
Old
05-15-2011, 10:02 PM
  #196
Blue Line Monster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 241
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nyr2k2 View Post
Well, what is potent?

The Rangers scored 224 goals last season, excluding the "goals" we're credited for when winning the SO. An average of 2.73, which was good for 16th in the league.

Let's assume Brad Richards himself adds a net of 10 goals over the center production we received this season--with Anisimov, Stepan, and Christensen taking turns as the top center. And let's optimistically project that Gaborik returns to form, and scores 35 goals (an additional 13 over his total from last year). IMO, reasonable, realistic production. And then we'll assume that the net output of all of the other players remains exactly the same.

That puts us at 247 goals, or an average of 3.01 goals per game. That would place us fifth in the league. That's pretty potent, in my humble opinion.

Now, there's obviously other factors to consider--reduced ice time/PP time for other players could result in a drop in their production, for one. But even if we only see a net increase of half of what I predicted, say 12 goals, we're still talking a jump into the fringes of the top ten. That's good, considering we're solid defensively and have elite goaltending.

Obviously, the biggest issue with the offense is consistency-- on some days, we're competent, bordering on noteworthy; on others, we're horrendous. Hopefully, adding a legitimate center and a rejuvenated Gaborik would do wonders for line stability and establishing roles, which in turn could lead to more consistent production.

Will all it happen? Will those projections pan out if we add Richards? I don't know. My point is that we shouldn't be that far from being considered a "good" offensive team.
To me, it's pretty alarming that we had the most 6+ goal games in the league but were still only 16th in goals scored. I feel like a broken record cause I've said this in a bunch of threads, but I think some people overrated the offense most of the year based on goals scored.

16th isn't good to begin with but I think from watching every game they were even worse than that, but had a penchant for blowing out teams whenever they got a decent lead.

IMO, if we were just rating offenses in the league, I think we'd be around 23 or something. With that said, I'm obviously in the sign Richards camp, this team needs skill badly.

Blue Line Monster is offline  
Old
05-15-2011, 10:05 PM
  #197
OverTheCap
Registered User
 
OverTheCap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 9,254
vCash: 500
Because of Hank, our offense need not be potent but merely above average. I'd be satisfied if we break the top ten in goals per game with Richards and maintain our goals against average per game. The key is being top ten in the league in both categories: 3 of the 4 teams remaining in the playoffs were top ten in both G/G and GA/G this season.

As 2k2 alluded to, consistency is key. They'll score 7 goals in one game and score only 1 goal the next. But acquiring Richards is one step towards becoming more consistent offensively. In 72 games played this past season, he failed to record a point in only 20 games. Richards is pretty reliable and will make his teammates around him better.

OverTheCap is offline  
Old
05-15-2011, 10:13 PM
  #198
captain9nyr
@captain9nyr
 
captain9nyr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Hammonton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 932
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to captain9nyr
BC Sports in my area had a stitched Naslund blue jersey for $50 with stitched down letters on a stitched down nameplate. For $50, I figure it's worth it if we sign Richards and he keeps #91, all I need is a Richards name plate. Get it done, Slats!

captain9nyr is offline  
Old
05-15-2011, 10:24 PM
  #199
BlueshirtBlitz
Rich Nash
 
BlueshirtBlitz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New York
Posts: 17,619
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OverTheCap View Post
Because of Hank, our offense need not be potent but merely above average. I'd be satisfied if we break the top ten in goals per game with Richards and maintain our goals against average per game. The key is being top ten in the league in both categories: 3 of the 4 teams remaining in the playoffs were top ten in both G/G and GA/G this season.

As 2k2 alluded to, consistency is key. They'll score 7 goals in one game and score only 1 goal the next. But acquiring Richards is one step towards becoming more consistent offensively. In 72 games played this past season, he failed to record a point in only 20 games. Richards is pretty reliable and will make his teammates around him better.
Exactly. That's how I see it, too. The offensive juggernauts are able to be just that because they skimp on goaltending, defense or both. If we can run a group that can simply score goals and have a top line comparable to some of these other teams, Hank gives us an advantage.

BlueshirtBlitz is offline  
Old
05-16-2011, 02:52 AM
  #200
NYR Sting
Heart and Soul
 
NYR Sting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,506
vCash: 500
You guys are hitting the nail right on the head here.

Lundqvist does give you the ability to go with merely a solid, rather than a spectacular, offense. 8th best offense in the league for this team, plus everything else this team has going for it=cup contender.

Consistency is the key. Just be able to score 3 goals on any given night, and Lundqvist will win you a lot of games. If you can't score 3 goals, you're probably not going to win most games.

NYR Sting 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 06:40 PM.

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.