PDA

View Full Version : The Practicality of Keeping Klein



Phil in Absentia
07-22-2014, 09:37 PM
Let me preface this by saying that while I am aware that the advanced stats metrics show that Klein saw sheltered playing time/minutes last season with the Rangers, I'm also not the type of person to think that's an indication that he's a bad player, or that it tells the whole story of a guy who has played just 30 of his 433 NHL games to date as a New York Ranger following a trade mid-season. Not that anyone else is saying this, but it should be said so we can skip past that and get to the meat of this argument.

Fact is, at $2.9M against the cap (a great number for the type of player he is) for the next four years, for a 29-year old defender who will be 33 when his contract is up you'd be hard-pressed to find many other peers making the same or less who would give you the same production. The issue the Rangers face with him is that they're paying him that to play on the teams' third pairing, where he probably belongs on the second, yet won't see it barring injury or some other drastic measure that sees Boyle or Girardi depart in some manner.

Worse yet, once Boyle was signed, they effectively shut the door on Conor Allen, who showed he's probably ready for NHL duty in his call-up last season, as well as Dylan McIlrath, who is probably rapidly approaching a cut-bait scenario with the franchise who had high expectations for a tenth overall pick. Both play the right side, so even if someone like Staal (UFA next season) leaves, you still aren't necessarily offering much of an opportunity to either.

Question is, what's the practicality of keeping him? Does the fact he's a right-handed shot add more value than on paper lets on, in spite of the drawbacks to the player himself or what his being here means to potential rookie D making the team? A lot is being made in the NHL of left/right combos up and down a teams' line-up, so I dunno, maybe there is something to that that I'm not seeing?

Again, while I'm not at all saying the guy sucks and needs to go, I do think the team might be better off in moving him soon for a package of draft picks, especially in coming out of the last three seasons in which they've moved so many in deals for other teams' talent. I can't imagine you can't get a couple of mid-round selections for a 29-year old right-handed D on a great contract who is signed for four more years.

Pete
07-22-2014, 10:15 PM
The advanced stats also showed that despite being sheltered, he wasn't very good.

Looks like we're getting cap friendly deals for Kreider and Zuccarello, so we're probably keeping him.

RangersFan
07-22-2014, 11:16 PM
I think being right handed makes him more valuable imo. Trading him isnt the right thing to do because of a few reasons.

1.who replaces him? We got to the cup using 4 lines and 6 dmen, his replacement will have to be just as good.

2. If we trade him for a few picks that might not even make the NHL, are we really getting better? We are trying to win a cup here. Having Klein on the 3rd pairing is a good thing imo

Phil in Absentia
07-22-2014, 11:21 PM
I think being right handed makes him more valuable imo. Trading him isnt the right thing to do because of a few reasons.

1.who replaces him? We got to the cup using 4 lines and 6 dmen, his replacement will have to be just as good.

2. If we trade him for a few picks that might not even make the NHL, are we really getting better? We are trying to win a cup here. Having Klein on the 3rd pairing is a good thing imo

Well, the advanced stats say he wasn't used very often, and when he was, it was against favorable competition (as in lesser competition), so the argument writes itself as to who replaces him — Conor Allen or McIlrath (likely Allen), who I think it's pretty clear could give you the same at a third of the cost. You're talking about 15:01 TOI/G on average there. Díaz actually averaged more per game in less games played, which kinda says something about the player Klein is.

Having Klein on the third pairing isn't a bad thing. You obviously didn't read my post, because I stated this off the bat. I don't even think he's a bad player. I said it's not cost-effective, and for a team against the ceiling, who've also traded away a slew of picks, including three first-round selections in as many years, there's value to be had in dealing him for draft picks to restock the cupboard, or allow the team some wiggle room at the deadline to maybe make a move or two.

TwoMinutesForNothing
07-22-2014, 11:23 PM
Allen would most likely play the left side for AV. He played the right side during the first half in Hartford out of necessity and then switched.

James Lionel Price
07-22-2014, 11:41 PM
Let me preface this by saying that while I am aware that the advanced stats metrics show that Klein saw sheltered playing time/minutes last season with the Rangers, I'm also not the type of person to think that's an indication that he's a bad player, or that it tells the whole story of a guy who has played just 30 of his 433 NHL games to date as a New York Ranger following a trade mid-season. Not that anyone else is saying this, but it should be said so we can skip past that and get to the meat of this argument.

Fact is, at $2.9M against the cap (a great number for the type of player he is) for the next four years, for a 29-year old defender who will be 33 when his contract is up you'd be hard-pressed to find many other peers making the same or less who would give you the same production. The issue the Rangers face with him is that they're paying him that to play on the teams' third pairing, where he probably belongs on the second, yet won't see it barring injury or some other drastic measure that sees Boyle or Girardi depart in some manner.

Worse yet, once Boyle was signed, they effectively shut the door on Conor Allen, who showed he's probably ready for NHL duty in his call-up last season, as well as Dylan McIlrath, who is probably rapidly approaching a cut-bait scenario with the franchise who had high expectations for a tenth overall pick. Both play the right side, so even if someone like Staal (UFA next season) leaves, you still aren't necessarily offering much of an opportunity to either.

Question is, what's the practicality of keeping him? Does the fact he's a right-handed shot add more value than on paper lets on, in spite of the drawbacks to the player himself or what his being here means to potential rookie D making the team? A lot is being made in the NHL of left/right combos up and down a teams' line-up, so I dunno, maybe there is something to that that I'm not seeing?

Again, while I'm not at all saying the guy sucks and needs to go, I do think the team might be better off in moving him soon for a package of draft picks, especially in coming out of the last three seasons in which they've moved so many in deals for other teams' talent. I can't imagine you can't get a couple of mid-round selections for a 29-year old right-handed D on a great contract who is signed for four more years.



We can't really afford to take many chances on defense, especially. The thing is though, he is ours, and what to do with him if Allen or someone else is truly ready, is something for our people to figure out. AV talked about expanding his role after exit interviews, so apparently the coaches think well of him. Getting Boyle should not be viewed as a slight to Klein. Klein is more or less a stay at home guy and Boyle was them upgrading the team with a true point man.

if they were unable to get a guy like Boyle, then Klein would have moved into Stralman's spot. As is, we lost 2 NHL D (Stralman, Diaz), and gained 1, so Allen has moved up the depth chart, and McIlraith too. Not gonna count Hunwick, he sucks IMO, and is not Rangers material.

TwoMinutesForNothing
07-22-2014, 11:44 PM
Like most of Klein's game, but his outlet passing is very weak. He's definitely no Wade Redden.

RangersFan
07-22-2014, 11:54 PM
Well, the advanced stats say he wasn't used very often, and when he was, it was against favorable competition (as in lesser competition), so the argument writes itself as to who replaces him — Conor Allen or McIlrath (likely Allen), who I think it's pretty clear could give you the same at a third of the cost. You're talking about 15:01 TOI/G on average there. Díaz actually averaged more per game in less games played, which kinda says something about the player Klein is.

Having Klein on the third pairing isn't a bad thing. You obviously didn't read my post, because I stated this off the bat. I don't even think he's a bad player. I said it's not cost-effective, and for a team against the ceiling, who've also traded away a slew of picks, including three first-round selections in as many years, there's value to be had in dealing him for draft picks to restock the cupboard, or allow the team some wiggle room at the deadline to maybe make a move or two.

Its hard to determine if Allen or McIlrath can give you the same thing because they really havent had the chance to prove it. Those guys should get top minutes in preseason imo. Just gotta be careful replacing vets with kids because it can backfire. Klein isnt flashy but he gets it done but i see where you are coming from.

And yeah thats true but if we move Klein, we need a guy who can replace him right away. Cant trade him for 2 2nd rounders and mess up the 3rd pairing just to restock a little bit. I'm fine with moving him as long as there is a decent replacement

Future
07-23-2014, 08:45 AM
If they get decent deals with Brass and Kreider, just hold onto him. Even if he becomes the 7th Dman so that McIlrath or Allen could come up, so be it. I know that's a lot of cash to put in the press box, but a guy like that can be invaluable. If an injury occurs, you could put him on pretty much any pairing - yes, even with Mac for a few games - and he'd be fine. If they don't end up right against the cap, I'd hold onto him.

Slobberknocker
07-23-2014, 08:59 AM
i didnt have a problem with kleins play. compared to girardi who was a total cluster..... in the LA series.

good stay at home dee man on the third line at a good salary, who stays healthy. there's no doubt in my mind we won that trade and stabilized ourselves in the process. Hell the guy we traded doesnt even have a job right now.

I'm not comparing him to Staal, mind you but I dont see anyway we keep him after this year. I'd rather trade him if the chance arose to get a high no.1 in 2015 and what i've read is being called a very deep draft.

AmericanJesus
07-23-2014, 09:15 AM
Klein presents a dilemma for us. I think in his role, we can replace him. He doesn't eat minutes. He was used less in the post season (when games are statistically longer) than in the regular season. I think you can get back a pretty decent return for him, as I think that there are probably 20 teams that would love to add a guy like him for their 2nd pair. Given our cap situation, trading him and replacing him for around $2M less is very attractive. Not only does it add flexibility now, if we sit on that $2M, by the trade deadline we can add around $7M in additional prorated salary if need be. In essence, we could pick up a Marian Gaborik type without having to send back any significant salary the other way, if need be.

The issue for me becomes, say we do decide to use Allen on the right or McIlrath is ready to be a 3rd pair defender. What happens if they faulter? Well, we can probably slot in another young guy or make a trade. A bigger issue, though. What if Boyle breaks down? He had a concussion that forced him to miss 7 games less than a year ago, and by his own admission, he came back too quickly (http://www.mercurynews.com/sharks/ci_24936760/sharks-dan-boyle-reveals-details-about-lingering-effects). Another concussion this year would put us in a very bad spot, if we don't have a guy like Klein to slot up.

With a guy like Klein ready to slot up if needed, one key injury doesn't necessarily derail our entire season. Ultimately, this may be too close to call. Perhaps we can still make a playoff run with a key injury on defense due to our strong top 4. And then we could use that cap savings to shore up the D at the deadline if necessary. The tipping point may be the return. If we could package for an upgrade to our top 6 forwards, perhaps it's worth while to make that move. Or if we could snag a first in the upcoming draft that has any chance to be a lottery pick, I might make that deal.

BlairBettsBlocksEverything
07-23-2014, 09:21 AM
While I wouldn't be completely opposed to moving him if the right deal came along, he's a solid bottom pair D that, if you're in a pinch, can be bumped up to the 2nd pair. I think John Moore is the D on the hot-seat right now, and if we are moving any defenseman to make room for a prospect, it's him. Not that I don't like Moore either, I think he has a ton of potential, is still young and will develop in to a better player.

Phil in Absentia
07-23-2014, 09:23 AM
Its hard to determine if Allen or McIlrath can give you the same thing because they really havent had the chance to prove it. Those guys should get top minutes in preseason imo. Just gotta be careful replacing vets with kids because it can backfire. Klein isnt flashy but he gets it done but i see where you are coming from.

And yeah thats true but if we move Klein, we need a guy who can replace him right away. Cant trade him for 2 2nd rounders and mess up the 3rd pairing just to restock a little bit. I'm fine with moving him as long as there is a decent replacement

Great response, and I don't disagree. There's absolutely risk in essentially awarding Allen or McIlrath a position on the team by default (though it's important to note they'd still have to actually win it in camp, where training camp invites or last-minute trades can and do still often occur).

BlairBettsBlocksEverything
07-23-2014, 09:26 AM
And yeah thats true but if we move Klein, we need a guy who can replace him right away. Cant trade him for 2 2nd rounders and mess up the 3rd pairing just to restock a little bit. I'm fine with moving him as long as there is a decent replacement

I'd actually be OK with that, if that happened on June 30th. Maybe not as much now, with the FA market dried up. But that would be a good return on him, especially when you consider we traded DZ for him.

MacTruck
07-23-2014, 01:15 PM
Does anybody think it's possible we don't keep John Moore and bring up Allen to save a little cap?

Phil in Absentia
07-23-2014, 01:17 PM
Does anybody think it's possible we don't keep John Moore and bring up Allen to save a little cap?

I doubt it. He has no arbitration rights, so his only "rights" in negotiating would be to sit out until he got the deal he wants, or until he compromised on his ask, like Stepan did.

RangersFan
07-23-2014, 01:19 PM
Great response, and I don't disagree. There's absolutely risk in essentially awarding Allen or McIlrath a position on the team by default (though it's important to note they'd still have to actually win it in camp, where training camp invites or last-minute trades can and do still often occur).

Yeah and it would be great if one of those guys did win the spot from Klein. Trade Klein for a few picks and free up space while Allen or McIlrath take care of the 3rd pairing with Moore.

RangersFan
07-23-2014, 01:19 PM
I'd actually be OK with that, if that happened on June 30th. Maybe not as much now, with the FA market dried up. But that would be a good return on him, especially when you consider we traded DZ for him.

We would need a replacement tho. Trade Klein right now and who steps in?

RangersFan
07-23-2014, 01:20 PM
i didnt have a problem with kleins play. compared to girardi who was a total cluster..... in the LA series.

good stay at home dee man on the third line at a good salary, who stays healthy. there's no doubt in my mind we won that trade and stabilized ourselves in the process. Hell the guy we traded doesnt even have a job right now.

I'm not comparing him to Staal, mind you but I dont see anyway we keep him after this year. I'd rather trade him if the chance arose to get a high no.1 in 2015 and what i've read is being called a very deep draft.

I think Girardi was just gassed lol, he looked finished out there

BlairBettsBlocksEverything
07-23-2014, 01:31 PM
We would need a replacement tho. Trade Klein right now and who steps in?

well that's what I mean when I say I'd be ok with that deal on June 30th. we'd have an extra 2.9 mil in cap space to find a replacement, and a couple of 2nd rounders to boot. Right now, there really isn't anyone left so I don't think I do that trade now unless we are very confident that McIlrath or Allen steps in and succeeds

AmericanJesus
07-23-2014, 01:41 PM
We would need a replacement tho. Trade Klein right now and who steps in?

I think this is probably the sensible thing to do. Find a replacement first. Let a kid win a spot over Klein in camp. Use Klein as a 7th for a little while. It might lower his value in trade, but you still remove the cap hit and can use it at the trade deadline. In the meantime we get to see if his replacement can hack it for at least 20-30 games and there's no doubt going to be teams with injuries that can use Klein down the road. Might even increase his value some.

NYR2711
07-23-2014, 02:00 PM
IMO, Klein is a player that you don't realize is out on the ice. Thats a good thing and a bad thing. Its good because that means he really isn't making mistakes and is covering his man. But, to me, its a bad thing because he isn't doing anything spectacular for the team either. He has a great cap number, but not for the spot he has on this team, which is exactly why Nashville moved him. I don't think he sucks, far from it, but Id rather save some cap space by using a guy like Allen in his spot. The only issue that opens up if he is moved is having a rookie playing with Moore on that third pair.

momentum
07-23-2014, 02:40 PM
Seems like the wrong move to me to trade a decent defenseman still in his 20's who's on a great contract for years to come. Even if it is to give room for a young up and coming player i feel it's not the way to go.
This is the kind of player you keep as he will give you good service for a low cap hit.
If anything I'd be looking HARD at Staal who has a MUCH higher trade value meaning we could get back something of REAL value and on top of it he's to make 5.5 mil ++ and his contract is up next year.
Staal is the guy to truly monitor closely this season and really try to determine his true value and future production and perhaps deal to not only get picks/and or valuable prospect back but to make room in a year for one of the younger guys to join the lineup, that way the youngsters get one more year to work on their game and next year could be the big test to see who makes it into the lineup with Staal (in this scenario) gone.

This scenario also make sense in the way that we've already invested lots on defense with McD and Girardi who are our go to top pairing, paying 5.5-6 million dollars on a second pairing defensamen who DOES NOT work the powerplay is not a good investment imo. Yes it makes the defense strong but it is at the cost of other parts of our team.
I feel we need to spread the wealth more and like you mentioned in the OP perhaps play a guy like Klein on the second pairing and instead use the 6 million Staal will command to enhance other parts of our lineups like center position for example.
Another way to go is to trade Girardi (not sure of no trade clause status) and sign Staal to replace him on the first pairing with McD.
Klein is just someone I would keep because he's very good bang for your buck IMO and that's so important in a salary capped league.

The Dude
07-23-2014, 07:52 PM
Girardi or Staal gotta go. Clearing what Klein makes off the cap isnt going to be enough to make an improvement elsewhere.

Package Staal and Brassard for a serious young or really good center or scorer. Yakopov (sp?) maybe? Thornton and a pick? Spezza would have been nice.

RangersFan
07-23-2014, 07:54 PM
Girardi or Staal gotta go. Clearing what Klein makes off the cap isnt going to be enough to make an improvement elsewhere.

Package Staal and Brassard for a serious young center or scorer. Yakopov (sp?) maybe? Thornton and a pick? Spezza would have been nice.

If you trade Brassard and Staal for Thornton, who replaces Staal? We get better offensively but we get killed defensively

The Dude
07-23-2014, 09:48 PM
If you trade Brassard and Staal for Thornton, who replaces Staal? We get better offensively but we get killed defensively

Klein slides up. Mclrath or Allen get a job. Or they sign or trade for a third pairing guy? Klein played big minutes for the Preds. Not like hes not capable, nor is he any kind of detriment. Cant trade the guy with the low cap hit and expect to upgrade the team with the 3 mill saved by dealing him. What 3 million dollar plsyer is helping this team get better?

momentum
07-23-2014, 09:49 PM
If you trade Brassard and Staal for Thornton, who replaces Staal? We get better offensively but we get killed defensively

We wouldn't get "killed" defensively. Like I said we can't have 6 mil defensemen on the second pairing who doesn't even help the power play, so either Staal or Girardi gotta go. We have a good top pairing with Mcd and Girardi and Girardi is already signed and that pairing works, so imo Staal is the one that should go, Boyle and Klein makes a decent second pairing for now, either one of the young guys is ready for the third pairing together with Moore or we need to sign another solid but not spectacular defensemen in the 3 mil range instead of 6 mil to address our needs.

RangersFan
07-24-2014, 12:17 PM
We wouldn't get "killed" defensively. Like I said we can't have 6 mil defensemen on the second pairing who doesn't even help the power play, so either Staal or Girardi gotta go. We have a good top pairing with Mcd and Girardi and Girardi is already signed and that pairing works, so imo Staal is the one that should go, Boyle and Klein makes a decent second pairing for now, either one of the young guys is ready for the third pairing together with Moore or we need to sign another solid but not spectacular defensemen in the 3 mil range instead of 6 mil to address our needs.
Sure we would get "killed" defensively. You wanna trade Staal but he is a big part of the defense whether you believe it or not. If one of the young guys are ready, then trade Klein for a pick or two. I would rather go with

Girardi-Mcdonagh
Boyle-Staal
Klein/young dman-Moore

than go with

Girardi-Mcd
Klein-Boyle
?-Moore

It ruins our defensive depth. And what do you think we can get for Staal? All this talk about him not being as good as he once was and people want top 6 centers and picks back for him? Who is trading that? We will need to take back salary in a trade too

RangersFan
07-24-2014, 12:18 PM
Klein slides up. Mclrath or Allen get a job. Or they sign or trade for a third pairing guy? Klein played big minutes for the Preds. Not like hes not capable, nor is he any kind of detriment. Cant trade the guy with the low cap hit and expect to upgrade the team with the 3 mill saved by dealing him. What 3 million dollar plsyer is helping this team get better?
It messes up our defensive depth. A few months ago our depth got us to a cup. No need to ruin it just because some people are disappointed in Staal

TwoMinutesForNothing
07-24-2014, 12:23 PM
Klein and Boyle can't play together. They are both exclusively RD.

Pete
07-24-2014, 12:33 PM
It messes up our defensive depth. A few months ago our depth got us to a cup. No need to ruin it just because some people are disappointed in Staal

What? No. Staal is a pending UFA who's going to command $5.5+, and some people don't want to invest $20 million plus in 4 defenseman. It has nothing to do with "some people are disappointed in Staal". Don't act like there aren't more than a handful of valid reasons to explore trading him.

RangersFan
07-24-2014, 12:38 PM
What? No. Staal is a pending UFA who's going to command $5.5+, and some people don't want to invest $20 million plus in 4 defenseman. It has nothing to do with "some people are disappointed in Staal". Don't act like there aren't more than a handful of valid reasons to explore trading him.

Who cares if he makes 5.5? If Girardi is worth 5.5, then so is Staal. Staal is the better dman. Chicago has 20 mil locked into 4 dmen, why cant we? Our team is built on defense and unless we really cant afford him, then trade him. Some people act like they wanna trade him because he had some bad games and thats what i disagree with.

Pete
07-24-2014, 12:54 PM
Who cares if he makes 5.5?IS this a serious question? You realize this is a capped league, right?


If Girardi is worth 5.5, then so is Staal. Staal is the better dman. I'm not going to keep arguing the ambiguous term "better". I wish the traded G. They didn't.


Chicago has 20 mil locked into 4 dmen, why cant we? You realize Chicago is in a cap nightmare?


Our team is built on defense and unless we really cant afford him, then trade him. Some people act like they wanna trade him because he had some bad games and thats what i disagree with.Our team WAS built on defense, but AV wants to play an up-tempo offensive game, and we need goals. And it's a capped league and we can't afford to hold on to everyone we ever drafted.

RangersFan
07-24-2014, 01:03 PM
IS this a serious question? You realize this is a capped league, right?

I'm not going to keep arguing the ambiguous term "better". I wish the traded G. They didn't.

You realize Chicago is in a cap nightmare?

Our team WAS built on defense, but AV wants to play an up-tempo offensive game, and we need goals. And it's a capped league and we can't afford to hold on to everyone we ever drafted.

The cap is going up. Why cant we sign Staal? Especially if we let St Louis go? If anything, trade Staal for Edler since he put up points with AV before and is left handed. Perfect replacement.

And this team will always be defense first. Its just the way it is. We need to keep our biggest strength (defense) instead of getting rid of it for offense.

Funny how AV is an offensive coach but scored less goals than the defensive coaches team did.

Pete
07-24-2014, 01:08 PM
The cap is going up. Why cant we sign Staal? Especially if we let St Louis go? If anything, trade Staal for Edler since he put up points with AV before and is left handed. Perfect replacement.Fine. Le's locked in for less than Staal would get, IMO.


And this team will always be defense first. Its just the way it is. We need to keep our biggest strength (defense) instead of getting rid of it for offense. Based on? Two consecutive coaches who wanted to play that way., AV doesn't.


Funny how AV is an offensive coach but scored less goals than the defensive coaches team did.Because the team lacks premier offensive players, something that some members are advocating changing —*by trading an expiring asset.

RangersFan
07-24-2014, 01:15 PM
Fine. Le's locked in for less than Staal would get, IMO.

Based on? Two consecutive coaches who wanted to play that way., AV doesn't.

Because the team lacks premier offensive players, something that some members are advocating changing —*by trading an expiring asset.

Would you make that trade? Staal for Edler?

Based on watching the team plau. We arent no offensive powerhouse.

Just because he is an offensive minded guy doesnt mean we arent a defensive team. We can be great defensively and improve the transition game and move the puck more because thats where offense comes from. Powerplays too. Playing good defense leads to offense, it leads to turnovers and odd man rushes.

What premier offensive player is getting traded for Staal? An unsigned Staal will get you a premier offensive player? I doubt it

fletch
07-24-2014, 04:21 PM
I think you keep Klein in place for at least a year before the kids are more ready to help contribute for a Cup contender. I think Slats can make the numbers work without finding a cheaper replacement. Signed for this season but not for next include: MSL, Zuccarello, Stepan, Hagelin, Staal - that's a lot of GM work to be done.

momentum
07-24-2014, 04:22 PM
Would you make that trade? Staal for Edler?

Based on watching the team plau. We arent no offensive powerhouse.

Just because he is an offensive minded guy doesnt mean we arent a defensive team. We can be great defensively and improve the transition game and move the puck more because thats where offense comes from. Powerplays too. Playing good defense leads to offense, it leads to turnovers and odd man rushes.

What premier offensive player is getting traded for Staal? An unsigned Staal will get you a premier offensive player? I doubt it

If you think Staal has such little value in a trade why would you shell out 5.5-6 mil for him? Staal could get us some pretty nice prospects/high picks OR a highly talented top 6 forward IMO. We're in a capped league, you can't spend this kind of money on a 2nd pairing guy who doesn't even play the PP. It would be about the same as pay 6 mil for a 3rd line defensive center who plays the PK but doesn't even play the PP. You just don't do it. No one is suggesting trading Staal because they are disappointed in him, we're suggesting it because he IS a good player and HAS decent value and is on an expiring contract and we have already invested heavily in our top pairing on D.
I think you are mistaken if you think our team would fall apart by trading Staal. Yes we would lose some defensive depth but it might make room for a youngster to come up and we would have more money to spend on improving other parts of our team.

The combined net result of a successful youngster on D to replace Staal and an improvement in other parts of the team might actually be a gain for the team as a whole rather than a loss.

RangersFan
07-24-2014, 04:45 PM
If you think Staal has such little value in a trade why would you shell out 5.5-6 mil for him? Staal could get us some pretty nice prospects/high picks OR a highly talented top 6 forward IMO. We're in a capped league, you can't spend this kind of money on a 2nd pairing guy who doesn't even play the PP. It would be about the same as pay 6 mil for a 3rd line defensive center who plays the PK but doesn't even play the PP. You just don't do it. No one is suggesting trading Staal because they are disappointed in him, we're suggesting it because he IS a good player and HAS decent value and is on an expiring contract and we have already invested heavily in our top pairing on D.
I think you are mistaken if you think our team would fall apart by trading Staal. Yes we would lose some defensive depth but it might make room for a youngster to come up and we would have more money to spend on improving other parts of our team.

The combined net result of a successful youngster on D to replace Staal and an improvement in other parts of the team might actually be a gain for the team as a whole rather than a loss.

A trade and contract value are two different things..

No youngsters are coming up to replace a second pairing shutdown dman anytime soon so the trade will need to have at least a dman

Puck Head
07-24-2014, 05:20 PM
IF Brady Skjei were one year further along, I'd look at moving Staal this season.

RangersFan
07-24-2014, 05:29 PM
IF Brady Skjei were one year further along, I'd look at moving Staal this season.

Same here. There needs to be a replacement if we trade Staal. Its a horrible move trading him for just offense. A dman would have to come back. Its nice to dream about the players we can get back for him but the reality is that we need a replacement. Klein wont cut it

The Dude
07-24-2014, 06:27 PM
A trade and contract value are two different things..

No youngsters are coming up to replace a second pairing shutdown dman anytime soon so the trade will need to have at least a dman

Right. So thats why Klein slides up to the 2nd pairing.

I like Staal. I think he bounced back in the 2nd half of the season and parts of the play offs. His raise on his next contract is going to hurt this teams ability to get better players here. I'd love to keep him. I'd rather deal Girardi, but I dont see that happening.

They need cap space. No offensive forward is knocking on the door to take a top 6 spot. Nor is there a legit top line center on the way up. Thats a bigger need for THIS team as constructed. Even signing Brassard at anything over 4 mill is going to hurt this team in production vs cap. They need a better center. Having Nash, MSL, Kreider, and Zooks centered by 40 point centers, is hurting this team IMO.

Who that guy is to bring in? Idk. I'd do a deal of Brassard and Staal for Thornton plus. I dont think many others would. But it solves a big problem that the team has had for..... Ever. Large bodied player eho isn't pushed around and is an elite talent.

Theres defensemen in the pipeline. They can play on the third pair or you can sign a guy like Shane O'brien. Cant play two righties on the same pairing (Klein and Boyle)? Since when? This team has consistently played 2 lefties together and had success. Whats the difference?

Trade Brassard and Staal. Clear cap space. Get a top line center. Team is better off in a capped league.

RangersFan
07-24-2014, 06:31 PM
Right. So thats why Klein slides up to the 2nd pairing.

I like Staal. I think he bounced back in the 2nd half of the season and parts of the play offs. His raise on his next contract is going to hurt this teams ability to get better players here. I'd love to keep him. I'd rather deal Girardi, but I dont see that happening.

They need cap space. No offensive forward is knocking on the door to take a top 6 spot. Nor is there a legit top line center on the way up. Thats a bigger need for THIS team as constructed. Even signing Brassard at anything over 4 mill is going to hurt this team in production vs cap. They need a better center. Having Nash, MSL, Kreider, and Zooks centered by 40 point centers, is hurting this team IMO.

Who that guy is to bring in? Idk. I'd do a deal of Brassard and Staal for Thornton plus. I dont think many others would. But it solves a big problem that the team has had for..... Ever. Large bodied player eho isn't pushed around and is an elite talent.

Theres defensemen in the pipeline. They can play on the third pair or you can sign a guy like Shane O'brien. Cant play two righties on the same pairing (Klein and Boyle)? Since when? This team has consistently played 2 lefties together and had success. Whats the difference?

Trade Brassard and Staal. Clear cap space. Get a top line center. Team is better off in a capped league.
We just made it to the cup, how the hell is it hurting the team? If we scored some damn goals we would have won the cup with those "40" point centers, and thats even wrong because they arent 40 point centers.

AV prefers right and left handed dmen together, thats why you cant play 2 rights.

Thornton is a joke and he wouldnt win shit here dude.

The Dude
07-24-2014, 06:33 PM
Same here. There needs to be a replacement if we trade Staal. Its a horrible move trading him for just offense. A dman would have to come back. Its nice to dream about the players we can get back for him but the reality is that we need a replacement. Klein wont cut it

Klein was a minutes eater in Nashville. Crap, hes pretty much a clone of Staal. Will hit, is solid on D, can carry the puck a little, has an ok shot from the point... I dont see why its thought that Klein isnt good enough for the 2nd pairing. Hes durable, can play big minutes, will fight if need be... Is it because they got him for Delzotto? Is that why? Klein is good enough.

RangersFan
07-24-2014, 06:34 PM
Klein was a minutes eater in Nashville. Crap, hes pretty much a clone of Staal. Will hit, is solid on D, can carry the puck a little, has an ok shot from the point... I dont see why its thought that Klein isnt good enough for the 2nd pairing. Hes durable, can play big minutes, will fight if need be... Is it because they got him for Delzotto? Is that why? Klein is good enough.

Because it would hurt our depth thats why.

Pete
07-24-2014, 06:41 PM
Klein was effective in limited, protected minutes since he got here, and became more ineffective as the playoffs wore on. He was pretty terrible all playoffs.

I don't see what who he was traded for has to do with it. He came decent enough, and just fell off really quickly.

The Dude
07-24-2014, 06:47 PM
We just made it to the cup, how the hell is it hurting the team? If we scored some damn goals we would have won the cup with those "40" point centers, and thats even wrong because they arent 40 point centers.

AV prefers right and left handed dmen together, thats why you cant play 2 rights.

Thornton is a joke and he wouldnt win shit here dude.

Huh? The offense wasnt good enough. You agree no? They lost a key winger of a line that lets say over achieved. They had trouble scoring WITH that guy they lost. They lost a key pk guy and locker room staple. They lost keys that made this team work. And getting to the finals isnt the same as winning it. They got out classed by the Kings on offense. Scoring 2 goals a game isn't going to win much. If you think this team could go into next season with the EXACT same team as last year and get as close as they did, I think you'd be greatly disappointed in the results.

Lots of chips fell in place for this team last season. Im not counting on lick like that again. They needed improvement on tje cup final team. They need improvement on the team they have now...

Thornton is a joke? Ok. I disagree. I think hes been on some pretty good teams that didn't have the ooomph to win it all. Thornton has decent play off stats. He shows up. He brings things that are lacking BIG TIME on this team. He hasnt won yet? Is that why hes a joke? Do we have to make a list of good/great players that haven't won?

What DOESN'T he bring that this team needs.

Sorry to mods for twisting the thread towards this subject.

The Dude
07-24-2014, 06:50 PM
Klein was effective in limited, protected minutes since he got here, and became more ineffective as the playoffs wore on. He was pretty terrible all playoffs.

I don't see what who he was traded for has to do with it. He came decent enough, and just fell off really quickly.

I didn't think he was all that bad at all. He was one of the few defenders who would carry the puck deep and or be a guy to get the right shot off from the point. Maybe I missed all this terrible play. I thought he wss decent.

Pete
07-24-2014, 06:53 PM
I didn't think he was all that bad at all. He was one of the few defenders who would carry the puck deep and or be a guy to get the right shot off from the point. Maybe I missed all this terrible play. I thought he wss decent.

By the time the finals came he was only playing 11 minutes a game against the easiest competition. That's not a guy I want my second pair.

I'm not against moving Staal to add offense, but I don't think Klein fill the hole on the second pair.

The Dude
07-24-2014, 07:14 PM
By the time the finals came he was only playing 11 minutes a game against the easiest competition. That's not a guy I want my second pair.

I'm not against moving Staal to add offense, but I don't think Klein fill the hole on the second pair.


Oh. I figured that was more about getting McD out there as much as possible to add offense. Along with the possible offense and solid D that they were getting from Strahlman. Add in that he was paired with Moore didn't help that combo getting ice time.

Guess we can agree to disagree.

Pete
07-24-2014, 07:17 PM
Oh. I figured that was more about getting McD out there as much as possible to add offense. Along with the possible offense and solid D that they were getting from Strahlman. Add in that he was paired with Moore didn't help that combo getting ice time.

Guess we can agree to disagree.

If that was the case, wouldn't they try and get McD out against weak opposition? In the offensive zone? Yet McD got mostly D zone starts against top lines.

Staal had 16 points this year and Stralman 12. There was little, if any, during to be had there.

Just my two cents.

The Dude
07-24-2014, 07:27 PM
If that was the case, wouldn't they try and get McD out against weak opposition? In the offensive zone? Yet McD got mostly D zone starts against top lines.

Staal had 16 points this year and Stralman 12. There was little, if any, during to be had there.

Just my two cents.

I would think its because he is their best defenseman? Their shut down pairing? Not being a wise ass. Thats my guess/thoughts.

I dont know why youre posting Staals and Strahlmans points. Is it because I said they were looking for offense from Strahlan? The guy had extra jump in his game in the playoffs, and was one of the few that could keep the puck in the offensive zone in the playoffs. The top 4 were pretty solid all around in the playoffs. Kinda hard not to try to get them out there more over the pairing of a liability, and a pretty good stay at homer.

Pete
07-24-2014, 07:39 PM
I would think its because he is their best defenseman? Their shut down pairing? Not being a wise ass. Thats my guess/thoughts.

I dont know why youre posting Staals and Strahlmans points. Is it because I said they were looking for offense from Strahlan? The guy had extra jump in his game in the playoffs, and was one of the few that could keep the puck in the offensive zone in the playoffs. The top 4 were pretty solid all around in the playoffs. Kinda hard not to try to get them out there more over the pairing of a liability, and a pretty good stay at homer.

Kinda hard to see where you're argument is coming from. First you said that Klein's minutes were low because they were trying to get minutes and offense from McD and Stralman.

Oh. I figured that was more about getting McD out there as much as possible to add offense. Along with the possible offense and solid D that they were getting from Strahlman.
Then you said McD is the shut down guy...and its pretty clear I'm posting Stralman points for that reason as well.

Most coaches would roll 5 D. None willingly roll 4. Klein just wasn't very good.

RangersFan
07-24-2014, 07:45 PM
Huh? The offense wasnt good enough. You agree no? They lost a key winger of a line that lets say over achieved. They had trouble scoring WITH that guy they lost. They lost a key pk guy and locker room staple. They lost keys that made this team work. And getting to the finals isnt the same as winning it. They got out classed by the Kings on offense. Scoring 2 goals a game isn't going to win much. If you think this team could go into next season with the EXACT same team as last year and get as close as they did, I think you'd be greatly disappointed in the results.

Lots of chips fell in place for this team last season. Im not counting on lick like that again. They needed improvement on tje cup final team. They need improvement on the team they have now...

Thornton is a joke? Ok. I disagree. I think hes been on some pretty good teams that didn't have the ooomph to win it all. Thornton has decent play off stats. He shows up. He brings things that are lacking BIG TIME on this team. He hasnt won yet? Is that why hes a joke? Do we have to make a list of good/great players that haven't won?

What DOESN'T he bring that this team needs.

Sorry to mods for twisting the thread towards this subject.
If anything, our wingers needed to finish better. Our centers were ok imo. And we scored enough against the Kings, we just couldnt hold the lead in those games. AV coached scared and the defense fell apart at times. Not sure how Thornton fixes that.

You say the chips fell in place for us and thats fine. You need to say that for every cup team in NHL history. Cant just shit on our cup appearance.

I'm counting on improvement from the young guys. Stepan, Kreider, Hagelin, Brassard, Moore, Mcdonagh. Maybe Miller comes in and surprises. The team cant be perfect dude.

And i just dont think Thornton is our savior. He is a good player but i just dont see him as the missing piece. I actually like our cenrers, if Nash scored some goals, we win the cup. Who said i dont like him because he hasnt won anything? One of my favorite players is Eric Lindros, did he win a cup? We are missing a legit offensive dman and another scoring winger. The center worries are a little overboard

The Dude
07-24-2014, 08:38 PM
Kinda hard to see where you're argument is coming from. First you said that Klein's minutes were low because they were trying to get minutes and offense from McD and Stralman.

Then you said McD is the shut down guy...and its pretty clear I'm posting Stralman points for that reason as well.

Most coaches would roll 5 D. None willingly roll 4. Klein just wasn't very good.

So McD cant be their best offensive Dman AND their shut down defender? I myself think hes that good.

I stated why I brought up Strahlmans offense. It was because IN THE PLAY OFFS he had more jump in his legs and was solid at keeping the puck in the offensive zone.

Do coaches roll 5 D? Meh. Not really. Usually coaches are big on their pairings and dont like shifting partners in and out.

I think you might be looking a bit much into Kleins decline in minutes.

I could be dead wrong. Just giving my opinion and how I see/saw it.

The Dude
07-24-2014, 08:50 PM
Meh. I think the center spot is the issue. We have bonafide scorers in Nash and MSL. Zuccs and Kreider have big potential. I think Nash scores more if he has a better center. A guy that can win a faceoff, make those passes through traffic, thread the needle on a tip in, and even pop a bunch in himself. A guy that can battle behind the net and come away with the puck.... These things create offense. Nash and others cant do all the heavy lifting all the time.

While I like both Brassard and Stepan. They are both 2nd line talent.

momentum
07-24-2014, 08:57 PM
IF Brady Skjei were one year further along, I'd look at moving Staal this season.

Just for the record in my first post I did not suggest moving Staal right now, but rather towards the later part of this coming season, this way we get a last look at what Staal really can do and our youngsters get one more year. Should Staal become some kind of monster playing as well as McD etc then we could look into keeping him and perhaps trading Girardi instead, should he keep going the way he has being solid defensively but unspectacular I would look to move him instead of shelling out another 6 mil on a dman for our second pairing. Should we move Staal and non of our prospects are ready then we could look to sign another solid vet for a few years who makes 3 mil or so instead of 6 mil to fill in until prospects are ready.

It's really all about asset management and sometimes you need to part with something that is good for the overall betterment of the team. When you have your top pairing locked down making over 5 mil each and a goalie making 8.5 mil a year it's hard to justify paying another 6 mil for a 2nd pairing guy who doesn't see the PP, even if he is very good, then instead you move him and spend that money somewhere else to make the team more balanced.
But I feel I'm just repeating myself here now and I apologize for that, I think I have made my point and where I stand. Doesn't mean I hate Staal, I actually like Staal, but we need to look at what's best for the team as a whole, not just what's best for the defense or keep a guy because we like him.
Over and out! :)

RangersFan
07-24-2014, 09:01 PM
Meh. I think the center spot is the issue. We have bonafide scorers in Nash and MSL. Zuccs and Kreider have big potential. I think Nash scores more if he has a better center. A guy that can win a faceoff, make those passes through traffic, thread the needle on a tip in, and even pop a bunch in himself. A guy that can battle behind the net and come away with the puck.... These things create offense. Nash and others cant do all the heavy lifting all the time.

While I like both Brassard and Stepan. They are both 2nd line talent.

If centers are a problem, explain the lockout season when Nash and Stepan were on fire. Nash still scored 26 goals last year

momentum
07-24-2014, 09:18 PM
If centers are a problem, explain the lockout season when Nash and Stepan were on fire. Nash still scored 26 goals last year

Tell me what team that won the cup recently where Stepan would slot as the number one guy.

RangersFan
07-24-2014, 09:42 PM
Tell me what team that won the cup recently where Stepan would slot as the number one guy.

We lost because we couldnt score a 3rd goal or defend a 2 goal lead. Stepan wasnt really a problem, especially with a broken jaw.

Pete
07-24-2014, 09:52 PM
So McD cant be their best offensive Dman AND their shut down defender? I myself think hes that good.

I stated why I brought up Strahlmans offense. It was because IN THE PLAY OFFS he had more jump in his legs and was solid at keeping the puck in the offensive zone.

Do coaches roll 5 D? Meh. Not really. Usually coaches are big on their pairings and dont like shifting partners in and out.

I think you might be looking a bit much into Kleins decline in minutes.

I could be dead wrong. Just giving my opinion and how I see/saw it.

Actually coaches will roll 5 capable D rather than 4. Every time.

momentum
07-25-2014, 05:18 AM
We lost because we couldnt score a 3rd goal or defend a 2 goal lead. Stepan wasnt really a problem, especially with a broken jaw.

You didn't answer the question

I'll help you: With a better topline center we might have scored that 3rd goals many times. Stepan is a good player, like him a lot, but on really good team he slots as the 2nd line center.

NYR2711
07-25-2014, 10:23 AM
You didn't answer the question

I'll help you: With a better topline center we might have scored that 3rd goals many times. Stepan is a good player, like him a lot, but on really good team he slots as the 2nd line center.

The problem with this question is that we had a better top line center in Richards, but for some reason, he wasn't hat player here for us that he should have been.

RangersFan
07-25-2014, 12:06 PM
You didn't answer the question

I'll help you: With a better topline center we might have scored that 3rd goals many times. Stepan is a good player, like him a lot, but on really good team he slots as the 2nd line center.

I dont want you to help me dude, thanks. Our wingers couldnt do shit and when they began to they stopped. In game 1 when we took that 2-0 lead, we were outskating them all over the ice but for some reason we completely stopped and that was it. If the team went for the kill at 2-0 instead of playing scared, maybe we would have won. 2-0 you need to put a team away. How about a PP goal or two? Or are we blaming that on Stepan too?

High and Wide
07-25-2014, 02:28 PM
Folks, lower the tone in this thread. There is no need to go at it personally. If you can't get your point across without being civil, walk away.

momentum
07-25-2014, 03:50 PM
I dont want you to help me dude, thanks. Our wingers couldnt do shit and when they began to they stopped. In game 1 when we took that 2-0 lead, we were outskating them all over the ice but for some reason we completely stopped and that was it. If the team went for the kill at 2-0 instead of playing scared, maybe we would have won. 2-0 you need to put a team away. How about a PP goal or two? Or are we blaming that on Stepan too?

I'm not blaming Stepan for anything, I'm simply pointing out that imo he's not suited for the topline role, he's simply the best one WE have for that role, ideally he should center a 2nd line. I also went on and declared that had we had a better topline center (for example if Richards who we signed for that role was as good as in Tampa and Dallas) and Stepan played on the 2nd line our team most likely would have been much harder to play against and we could possibly have seen a different result in the final series.

RangersFan
07-25-2014, 04:08 PM
I'm not blaming Stepan for anything, I'm simply pointing out that imo he's not suited for the topline role, he's simply the best one WE have for that role, ideally he should center a 2nd line. I also went on and declared that had we had a better topline center (for example if Richards who we signed for that role was as good as in Tampa and Dallas) and Stepan played on the 2nd line our team most likely would have been much harder to play against and we could possibly have seen a different result in the final series.

Right. If you say so. Maybe Nash and our wingers will score some more goals next time

MacTruck
07-25-2014, 04:23 PM
I'm not blaming Stepan for anything, I'm simply pointing out that imo he's not suited for the topline role, he's simply the best one WE have for that role, ideally he should center a 2nd line. I also went on and declared that had we had a better topline center (for example if Richards who we signed for that role was as good as in Tampa and Dallas) and Stepan played on the 2nd line our team most likely would have been much harder to play against and we could possibly have seen a different result in the final series.

While I understand your point, I still believe Stepan is a top 30 center in the league. He's offensive minded and should be considered a first liner. Sure I would love Stepan to be a Malkin to my Crosby, a Spezza to my Seguin, a Mackinnon to my Duchene, or a Kesler to my Getzlaf. Steps may be a low end first line center but he's a top 30 middle man who plays both ends of the ice and is still developing.

AmericanJesus
07-25-2014, 04:32 PM
While I understand your point, I still believe Stepan is a top 30 center in the league. He's offensive minded and should be considered a first liner. Sure I would love Stepan to be a Malkin to my Crosby, a Spezza to my Seguin, a Mackinnon to my Duchene, or a Kesler to my Getzlaf. Steps may be a low end first line center but he's a top 30 middle man who plays both ends of the ice and is still developing.

Stepan is probably in the lower part of the top 30 centers in the league. But that's simply not good enough if you want a cup unless you have a second center that's in that same range. IE, if we would have gotten Stastny (and we couldn't because of the cap) and we had Stepan - Stastny - Brassard - Moore as our 4 centers, that's fine. But when we don't have that second 1b/2a center, then we end up weak at center. As poor as Richards looked at times, he at least gave us a 1b/2a in Stepan, a 2a in Richards and a 2b, 3a in Brassard, plus Moore/Boyle for defensive zone draws since all our top 3 centers were different grades of poor in the faceoff dot.

Now, going Stepan - Brassard - Miller - Moore, if that's how it shakes out, will really require Miller to excell if we're going to be even as deep as we were last season. I'd say our center depth last season was in the 10-15th range in the league. If Miller is only average, we're probably in the 15-20 range if Stepan has a career year.

Not exactly a thrilling prospect if you want a cup this year.

Pete
07-25-2014, 04:36 PM
While I understand your point, I still believe Stepan is a top 30 center in the league. He's offensive minded and should be considered a first liner. Sure I would love Stepan to be a Malkin to my Crosby, a Spezza to my Seguin, a Mackinnon to my Duchene, or a Kesler to my Getzlaf. Steps may be a low end first line center but he's a top 30 middle man who plays both ends of the ice and is still developing.

I was just going to type this.

The center position in the NHL is thin. Most of the better centermen are in the west. Calling Stepan a first liner is a fact, because, well — he plays on the first line.

He may very well be a top 30 center in the league. But who can really brag about having the "worst" first line center in the NHL? No, I don't think Stepan is the worst first line center. But I'd say he's in the top of the bottom third of centers. He isn't ideal. There are maybe 7-8 GMs in the NHL who would rather have Stepan as their first line center than their current first line center. But I think there are probably 25 GMs who would want Stepan as their 2nd line center.

Hope I'm making sense.

Point is, while Stepan has performed admirably under the circumstances, let's not act like the position can't be upgraded.

RangersFan
07-25-2014, 04:51 PM
I was just going to type this.

The center position in the NHL is thin. Most of the better centermen are in the west. Calling Stepan a first liner is a fact, because, well — he plays on the first line.

He may very well be a top 30 center in the league. But who can really brag about having the "worst" first line center in the NHL? No, I don't think Stepan is the worst first line center. But I'd say he's in the top of the bottom third of centers. He isn't ideal. There are maybe 7-8 GMs in the NHL who would rather have Stepan as their first line center than their current first line center. But I think there are probably 25 GMs who would want Stepan as their 2nd line center.

Hope I'm making sense.

Point is, while Stepan has performed admirably under the circumstances, let's not act like the position can't be upgraded.
You hate Stepan dude lol

Pete
07-25-2014, 04:57 PM
You hate Stepan dude lol

I didn't realize having a realistic viewpoint and opinion of a player supported by facts means "hate".

Puck Head
07-25-2014, 04:58 PM
I was just going to type this.

The center position in the NHL is thin. Most of the better centermen are in the west. Calling Stepan a first liner is a fact, because, well — he plays on the first line.

He may very well be a top 30 center in the league. But who can really brag about having the "worst" first line center in the NHL? No, I don't think Stepan is the worst first line center. But I'd say he's in the top of the bottom third of centers. He isn't ideal. There are maybe 7-8 GMs in the NHL who would rather have Stepan as their first line center than their current first line center. But I think there are probably 25 GMs who would want Stepan as their 2nd line center.

Hope I'm making sense.

Point is, while Stepan has performed admirably under the circumstances, let's not act like the position can't be upgraded.

I'm a big fan of Stepan, (I don't think we've seen his best yet).

But Pete isn't showing hate here, this post is about spot on.
I'm damn glad Stepan and Kredier have developed as far as they have, but I'm not confusing Stepan with anybody in the top 15-20 in his position.

Pete
07-25-2014, 05:02 PM
I'm a big fan of Stepan, (I don't think we've seen his best yet).

But Pete isn't showing hate here, this post is about spot on.
I'm damn glad Stepan and Kredier have developed as far as they have, but I'm not confusing Stepan with anybody in the top 15-20 in his position.

Thanks, haha.

I actually don't hate Stepan. I'd be thrilled if he were our 2nd line center. But if we have to part with him to land a better top line center, then I'd be OK with that.

RangersFan
07-25-2014, 05:03 PM
I'm a big fan of Stepan, (I don't think we've seen his best yet).

But Pete isn't showing hate here, this post is about spot on.
I'm damn glad Stepan and Kredier have developed as far as they have, but I'm not confusing Stepan with anybody in the top 15-20 in his position.
Nobody said he was top 15 lol

RangersFan
07-25-2014, 05:03 PM
Thanks, haha.

I actually don't hate Stepan. I'd be thrilled if he were our 2nd line center. But if we have to part with him to land a better top line center, then I'd be OK with that.
Just curious but what would you trade Stepan for?

Pete
07-25-2014, 05:04 PM
Just curious but what would you trade Stepan for?

I would've been OK with moving him for Spezza.

The Dude
07-25-2014, 05:10 PM
If centers are a problem, explain the lockout season when Nash and Stepan were on fire. Nash still scored 26 goals last year


Idk. Same reason why Brad Richards stunk that year? It happened. Im not saying these guys arent good. Just saying they are both 2nd line center given their offensive output and how they dont elevate their line mates play. When Nash is going for the Rangers, its usually because of his own doing. I mean are we gonna really debate how great this team is? I feel they need more presence up the middle. Imo, its a job too big for Stepan and Brassard.

Im sorry. I think they need better on the first line.

Puck Head
07-25-2014, 05:14 PM
Idk. Same reason why Brad Richards stunk that year? It happened. Im not saying these guys arent good. Just saying they are both 2nd line center given their offensive output and how they dont elevate their line mates play. When Nash is going for the Rangers, its usually because of his own doing. I mean are we gonna really debate how great this team is? I feel they need more presence up the middle. Imo, its a job too big for Stepan and Brassard.

Im sorry. I think they need better on the first line.

They could be better, (even McD could be upgraded)....
But Nash's issues are all on his own. Especially the playoffs, multiple scoring chances created by linemates, he just couldn't finish.

The Dude
07-25-2014, 05:20 PM
I was just going to type this.

The center position in the NHL is thin. Most of the better centermen are in the west. Calling Stepan a first liner is a fact, because, well — he plays on the first line.

He may very well be a top 30 center in the league. But who can really brag about having the "worst" first line center in the NHL? No, I don't think Stepan is the worst first line center. But I'd say he's in the top of the bottom third of centers. He isn't ideal. There are maybe 7-8 GMs in the NHL who would rather have Stepan as their first line center than their current first line center. But I think there are probably 25 GMs who would want Stepan as their 2nd line center.

Hope I'm making sense.

Point is, while Stepan has performed admirably under the circumstances, let's not act like the position can't be upgraded.

Kinda what I was saying, but better. How do the Rangers upgrade the top center slot? Such a player is going to have a lagre scale contract. A couple of contracts have to go in order to make the move.

I guess the issue is whats more important. Rock solid top 4 D pairing, or turning that corner and packing an offensive punch?
Im ok with Klein on the 2nd pairing. Although I'm curious to see how nice a Staal/Boyle pairing could be.

The Dude
07-25-2014, 05:24 PM
They could be better, (even McD could be upgraded)....
But Nash's issues are all on his own. Especially the playoffs, multiple scoring chances created by linemates, he just couldn't finish.

I think more couldn't finish. The guy did a lot on his own and was either shut down by a great defensive lsst ditch effort, or a nice save. I truly believe if he has a serious top center the guy gets more done.

RangersFan
07-25-2014, 07:03 PM
Idk. Same reason why Brad Richards stunk that year? It happened. Im not saying these guys arent good. Just saying they are both 2nd line center given their offensive output and how they dont elevate their line mates play. When Nash is going for the Rangers, its usually because of his own doing. I mean are we gonna really debate how great this team is? I feel they need more presence up the middle. Imo, its a job too big for Stepan and Brassard.

Im sorry. I think they need better on the first line.

And i think Nash needs to be better in the playoffs at scoring goals.

The Dude
07-25-2014, 10:26 PM
And i think Nash needs to be better in the playoffs at scoring goals.

Yes. Get him a center who doesnt shy away from contact and can win a battle for the puck, we may see more. Support never hurts.

momentum
07-26-2014, 04:41 PM
I was just going to type this.

The center position in the NHL is thin. Most of the better centermen are in the west. Calling Stepan a first liner is a fact, because, well — he plays on the first line.

He may very well be a top 30 center in the league. But who can really brag about having the "worst" first line center in the NHL? No, I don't think Stepan is the worst first line center. But I'd say he's in the top of the bottom third of centers. He isn't ideal. There are maybe 7-8 GMs in the NHL who would rather have Stepan as their first line center than their current first line center. But I think there are probably 25 GMs who would want Stepan as their 2nd line center.

Hope I'm making sense.

Point is, while Stepan has performed admirably under the circumstances, let's not act like the position can't be upgraded.

EXACTLY, people take criticism of the team for not getting a better top center as criticism of Stepan, Stepan is just played in a position where he isn't suited because we have no one better. That is indeed the teams fault, not Stepan, but let's not pretend he's some kind of bona fide top line center just because he's a nice guy and he's on our team and plays that position. Also like you said, so what if he's in the top 30 center in the league? We're supposed to be a contender and top line center position is one of the most important positions on a team and we have the lets say number 26th best top line center on our team......not good enough, despite him being in the top 30.
It's the same as if we had the 26th starting goalie in the league...sure..it would be starter but it wouldn't be good enough if we wanted to contend and it would require we upgrade the position.

momentum
07-26-2014, 04:44 PM
Kinda what I was saying, but better. How do the Rangers upgrade the top center slot? Such a player is going to have a lagre scale contract. A couple of contracts have to go in order to make the move.

I guess the issue is whats more important. Rock solid top 4 D pairing, or turning that corner and packing an offensive punch?
Im ok with Klein on the 2nd pairing. Although I'm curious to see how nice a Staal/Boyle pairing could be.

This is exactly why I have suggested looking to move Staal, the money save/ assets he would bring back is one possible way maybe to improve at topline center position. If we trade Klein we just get some pick or prospects back, Staal has real value and we already have a top pairing. Wonder what kind of top center Staal plus Stepan would land, or Staal plus Brassard.

RangersFan
07-26-2014, 08:07 PM
Yes. Get him a center who doesnt shy away from contact and can win a battle for the puck, we may see more. Support never hurts.

Maybe he should get a bit more involved in the playoffs and go for some loose pucks and battle a little

James Lionel Price
07-27-2014, 01:16 AM
Maybe he should get a bit more involved in the playoffs and go for some loose pucks and battle a little



LOL. Agree. Let's all face up to how Rick Nash is a perimeter player. If he went to the net like Kreider, he'd score. But, he also has pretty bad hands for a guy of his magnitude, unless he is making some highlight reel goal, which he never does in the playoffs, going 1 on 4, etc.

Nash has had by far his best center here, side for Team Canada's fantasy land. They are stuck with this guy right now and until something changes, and if it's anyone's fault, it's not his centermen. In fact, they are both far far more productive than him.

The Dude
07-27-2014, 12:04 PM
Maybe he should get a bit more involved in the playoffs and go for some loose pucks and battle a little

???? Could have swore I saw Nash cutting to the net on his own, and also taking the body along the boards and behind the for most of the playoffs. Couldn't put the puck in the net, and was a bit weak on his skates getting knocked down very easily. But lets not make things up and exagerate his play.

The Dude
07-27-2014, 12:06 PM
LOL. Agree. Let's all face up to how Rick Nash is a perimeter player. If he went to the net like Kreider, he'd score. But, he also has pretty bad hands for a guy of his magnitude, unless he is making some highlight reel goal, which he never does in the playoffs, going 1 on 4, etc.

Nash has had by far his best center here, side for Team Canada's fantasy land. They are stuck with this guy right now and until something changes, and if it's anyone's fault, it's not his centermen. In fact, they are both far far more productive than him.

Disagree that Nash is a perimeter player. Hes the only player on the team that takes the puck to the middle of the ice and at the goalie.

Mike
07-27-2014, 12:46 PM
LOL. Agree. Let's all face up to how Rick Nash is a perimeter player. If he went to the net like Kreider, he'd score. But, he also has pretty bad hands for a guy of his magnitude, unless he is making some highlight reel goal, which he never does in the playoffs, going 1 on 4, etc.

Nash has had by far his best center here, side for Team Canada's fantasy land. They are stuck with this guy right now and until something changes, and if it's anyone's fault, it's not his centermen. In fact, they are both far far more productive than him.

Rick Nash does not have bad hands. He was knocked off the puck frequently, but he didn't lose it because of his hands. I'd trust him to push an infant across 8th avenue during rush hour when the light is green.

Kevin
07-27-2014, 02:26 PM
Well, let's say that Stepan is the 25th rated center in the league. The next 5 highest rated would probably be considered, by many, to be similar to Stepan in terms of production. This leaves like 20 #1 centers in the league that would be an upgrade. How many of those guys would be available via trade and have a contract that would fit with our team. Probably not too many options out there.

RangersFan
07-27-2014, 03:40 PM
Disagree that Nash is a perimeter player. Hes the only player on the team that takes the puck to the middle of the ice and at the goalie.

Nash IS a perimeter player. He goes to the net usually backwards and loses the puck, other than that what net presence does he give? He can have 18 shots a game, if they arent good close shots,who cares?

RangersFan
07-27-2014, 03:42 PM
EXACTLY, people take criticism of the team for not getting a better top center as criticism of Stepan, Stepan is just played in a position where he isn't suited because we have no one better. That is indeed the teams fault, not Stepan, but let's not pretend he's some kind of bona fide top line center just because he's a nice guy and he's on our team and plays that position. Also like you said, so what if he's in the top 30 center in the league? We're supposed to be a contender and top line center position is one of the most important positions on a team and we have the lets say number 26th best top line center on our team......not good enough, despite him being in the top 30.
It's the same as if we had the 26th starting goalie in the league...sure..it would be starter but it wouldn't be good enough if we wanted to contend and it would require we upgrade the position.

We were just a contender with Stepan being the 1st line center. Who can we trade Stepan for that would upgrade the center position?

momentum
07-27-2014, 03:54 PM
We were just a contender with Stepan being the 1st line center. Who can we trade Stepan for that would upgrade the center position?

I don't know, I'm just pointing out that our team could use an upgrade on its top line center position. it's up to Slats and the management to try to figure out the best way how. They already recognized it and tried to sign Brad Richards for the top line center position but that didn't work out because he was further past his prime than they probably thought. So they should try to figure it out again, not just shrug their shoulders and go...oh well...guess we'll just go with Stepan then....when they know he's not really suited for the role. They might be FORCED to go with Stepan because of lack of available centers but that doesn't change the fact that Stepan isn't suited for the role.

Also we might have CONTENDED for the cup, but going into the playoffs pretty much no one considered Rangers a real contender. Many many things fell into place for the rangers and they had a lot of luck on the road to the Stanley cup finals...and still came up short....we might not have the same kind of luck the next time and we should prepare by not counting on it and instead try to improve any weak spot on the team as much as possible....as good as Stepan is he is such a spot.

RangersFan
07-27-2014, 04:14 PM
I don't know, I'm just pointing out that our team could use an upgrade on its top line center position. it's up to Slats and the management to try to figure out the best way how. They already recognized it and tried to sign Brad Richards for the top line center position but that didn't work out because he was further past his prime than they probably thought. So they should try to figure it out again, not just shrug their shoulders and go...oh well...guess we'll just go with Stepan then....when they know he's not really suited for the role. They might be FORCED to go with Stepan because of lack of available centers but that doesn't change the fact that Stepan isn't suited for the role.

Also we might have CONTENDED for the cup, but going into the playoffs pretty much no one considered Rangers a real contender. Many many things fell into place for the rangers and they had a lot of luck on the road to the Stanley cup finals...and still came up short....we might not have the same kind of luck the next time and we should prepare by not counting on it and instead try to improve any weak spot on the team as much as possible....as good as Stepan is he is such a spot.
Doesnt really matter what people thought heading into the playoffs dude. We were one of the last teams standing whether people thought it would happen or not. Just funny how we reached a cup with Stepan manning the 1st line with a busted jaw and a Nash who wasnt scoring.

People said the same thing in 2012 when we reached the ECF. 2 years later we reached the cup. Funny how that happens. Saying Stepan is a #2 center is fine. Saying we arent a contender with him on the top line is just false

Mike
07-27-2014, 04:25 PM
Doesnt really matter what people thought heading into the playoffs dude. We were one of the last teams standing whether people thought it would happen or not. Just funny how we reached a cup with Stepan manning the 1st line with a busted jaw and a Nash who wasnt scoring.

People said the same thing in 2012 when we reached the ECF. 2 years later we reached the cup. Funny how that happens. Saying Stepan is a #2 center is fine. Saying we arent a contender with him on the top line is just false
I like Stepan, but him being the #1 center wasn't the reason they went as far as they did. The team made it that far in spite of Stepan's, and Nash's below average play.

RangersFan
07-27-2014, 04:36 PM
I like Stepan, but him being the #1 center wasn't the reason they went as far as they did. The team made it that far in spite of Stepan's, and Nash's below average play.

But he was the center on the 1st line. We got to the cup due to our depth and if we scored some goals we would have won. Stepan could have been better but he also wasnt horrible.

Also, how the hell did a Klein thread turn into a Stepan thread? Lol

Mike
07-27-2014, 04:39 PM
But he was the center on the 1st line. We got to the cup due to our depth and if we scored some goals we would have won. Stepan could have been better but he also wasnt horrible.

Also, how the hell did a Klein thread turn into a Stepan thread? Lol
Right. I think that's what everyone is saying.


Idk, I just realized that myself. Then again, it's my first day back.

RangersFan
07-27-2014, 04:41 PM
Right. I think that's what everyone is saying.


Idk, I just realized that myself. Then again, it's my first day back.
Yeah well that i agree with.

And its weird lol it just happened

The Dude
07-27-2014, 07:46 PM
Nash IS a perimeter player. He goes to the net usually backwards and loses the puck, other than that what net presence does he give? He can have 18 shots a game, if they arent good close shots,who cares?


Goes to the net backwards? Can you explain what you mean by that? No. Nash isnt Adam Graves, screening the goalie taking a beating in the front of the net. But he doesnt shoot from the boards or shy away from contact.

He is consistently driving to the net with the puck, frequently powereing past defenders.
Sadly he is like a deer on ice and seems to get knocked down easily. Nash is always in the middle of the ice and shooting down low, or on a deke. How thats considered perimeter. ... ? Idk.

Pete
07-27-2014, 07:51 PM
We were just a contender with Stepan being the 1st line center. Who can we trade Stepan for that would upgrade the center position?

You keep saying this, but the stars had to align for the Rangers to make the finals. And not, the stars didn't align for LA. They're THAT good.

AmericanJesus
07-27-2014, 07:59 PM
You keep saying this, but the stars had to align for the Rangers to make the finals. And not, the stars didn't align for LA. They're THAT good.

Eh, LA certainly did have the stars align for them, too. San Jose's collapse was epic. They took 7 games in each of the first tree series and it took 3 OTs to beat us. They had a lot of inches add up to get them to a Championship.

Pete
07-27-2014, 08:33 PM
Eh, LA certainly did have the stars align for them, too. San Jose's collapse was epic. They took 7 games in each of the first tree series and it took 3 OTs to beat us. They had a lot of inches add up to get them to a Championship.

I feel they made life hard on themselves. I feel had and enormous amount of breaks. Pittsburgh's collapse was just as epic. Price was hurt. Crosby was hurt. There was a bonding tragedy.

RangersFan
07-27-2014, 08:45 PM
You keep saying this, but the stars had to align for the Rangers to make the finals. And not, the stars didn't align for LA. They're THAT good.


The Kings were not that good at all. They needed so many bounces and OTs to win its not even funny. Luckiest team in the world

RangersFan
07-27-2014, 08:46 PM
I feel they made life hard on themselves. I feel had and enormous amount of breaks. Pittsburgh's collapse was just as epic. Price was hurt. Crosby was hurt. There was a bonding tragedy.

And the Sharks are a bunch of choke artists that couldnt win a series up 3-0. LA is lucky that San Jose was the team that had them down 3-0. Any other team doesnt let them come back

Pete
07-27-2014, 09:06 PM
And the Sharks are a bunch of choke artists that couldnt win a series up 3-0. LA is lucky that San Jose was the team that had them down 3-0. Any other team doesnt let them come back
That just proves my point. Coming back from 3 nothing on the Sharks is no big deal.

Mike
07-27-2014, 09:13 PM
Championship teams make the best of the worst situations. They take advantage of every opportunity given. The Rangers, and the Kings both did these things on their way to the SCF. A lot of quirky things happened in that series to make us lose in 5. Things didn't go our way. Remember the little things, and the experience. Learn from it and move on.

Pete
07-27-2014, 09:24 PM
Championship teams make the best of the worst situations. They take advantage of every opportunity given. The Rangers, and the Kings both did these things on their way to the SCF. A lot of quirky things happened in that series to make us lose in 5. Things didn't go our way. Remember the little things, and the experience. Learn from it and move on.

Right, agreed. But that doesn't mean you maintain the status quo because you went to a final.

Mike
07-27-2014, 09:33 PM
Right, agreed. But that doesn't mean you maintain the status quo because you went to a final.

Of course not. Even the winning team makes changes. The Rangers got that far with little contribution from their top line. It's a tough situation.

RangersFan
07-27-2014, 09:49 PM
That just proves my point. Coming back from 3 nothing on the Sharks is no big deal.

But you make it seem like LA was this big powerhouse cup favorite team, they got bounces just like we did and barely beat us considering all of the OT games. If the stars aligned for us, it did for them too. No team is just gifted cup runs

Pete
07-27-2014, 10:01 PM
But you make it seem like LA was this big powerhouse cup favorite team, they got bounces just like we did and barely beat us considering all of the OT games. If the stars aligned for us, it did for them too. No team is just gifted cup runs

They were a powerhouse cup favorite. The stars didn't align. They under achieved for a lot of the playoffs. Rangers overachieved.

RangersFan
07-27-2014, 10:06 PM
They were a powerhouse cup favorite. The stars didn't align. They under achieved for a lot of the playoffs. Rangers overachieved.

How? The Kings could barely score during the season. They really werent anything special imo. Luckiest team in the NHL

Pete
07-27-2014, 10:08 PM
How? The Kings could barely score during the season. They really werent anything special imo. Luckiest team in the NHL

2 of the last 3 Cups. Lucky. Right.

RangersFan
07-27-2014, 10:10 PM
2 of the last 3 Cups. Lucky. Right.

Hell yeah they were lucky. If we were lucky, they are lucky too. Maybe not in 2012 but this year they were very lucky

Pete
07-27-2014, 10:15 PM
Hell yeah they were lucky. If we were lucky, they are lucky too. Maybe not in 2012 but this year they were very lucky

I don't see how your logic applies. If we we were lucky, they were? Why? Because both teams went to the finals?

Look the Kings have a western power. The rangers barely made the playoffs and capitalized on injury and favorable matchups. The kings didn't. They just did it the hard way.

Drew a Penalty
07-27-2014, 10:18 PM
How? The Kings could barely score during the season. They really werent anything special imo. Luckiest team in the NHL

They also had the lowest goals allowed. The Kings are a very good defensive team. They don't need to get by on just offense.

RangersFan
07-27-2014, 10:19 PM
I don't see how your logic applies. If we we were lucky, they were? Why? Because both teams went to the finals?

Look the Kings have a western power. The rangers barely made the playoffs and capitalized on injury and favorable matchups. The kings didn't. They just did it the hard way.
So we were just lucky and had no chance of beating the almighty Kings? Right

RangersFan
07-27-2014, 10:20 PM
They also had the lowest goals allowed. The Kings are a very good defensive team. They don't need to get by on just offense.

They went down 3-0 to San Jose, theyre lucky to play a shitty Niemi and a core of chokers. Were a good defensive team too

Pete
07-27-2014, 10:23 PM
So we were just lucky and had no chance of beating the almighty Kings? Right

Quote the post where I discussed the rangers chances of beating the kings (although Rome will confirm I called kings in 5)?

You're the only one mentioning the kings. You keep reiterating that the rangers made a cup final... So we shouldn't make changes? Fact is, they lost a cup final by a wide margin. Improvements are needed. Simple story.

RangersFan
07-27-2014, 10:26 PM
Quote the post where I discussed the rangers chances of beating the kings (although Rome will confirm I called kings in 5)?

You're the only one mentioning the kings. You keep reiterating that the rangers made a cup final... So we shouldn't make changes? Fact is, they lost a cup final by a wide margin. Improvements are needed. Simple story.

Show me where i said we shouldnt make changes because we made a cup final. I never said anything like that

Drew a Penalty
07-27-2014, 10:27 PM
They went down 3-0 to San Jose, theyre lucky to play a shitty Niemi and a core of chokers. Were a good defensive team too

Just out of curiosity, what's your take on us coming back from Pittsburgh? Were we not as lucky? Did we not play a team with a shitty Fleury, a hurt Crosby and an epic lacking of team depth?

Also if we were better defensively the Kings wouldn't have come back from a deficit in 3 games.

RangersFan
07-27-2014, 10:29 PM
Just out of curiosity, what's your take on us coming back from Pittsburgh? Were we not as lucky? Did we not play a team with a shitty Fleury, a hurt Crosby and an epic lacking of team depth?

Also if we were better defensively the Kings wouldn't have come back from a deficit in 3 games.

We got lucky but wasnt that Pittsburgh team supposed to run us over? Werent they better than us? We pulled that series out of our ass.

And if we didnt play like bitches after we were up 2-0, maybe those games go different. Canucks fans said AV coached scared against Boston too. If we are suck a different team, why did we sit back on those leads?

Pete
07-27-2014, 10:30 PM
Show me where i said we shouldnt make changes because we made a cup final. I never said anything like that

Yes you have. We said to improve on Stepan, you said we just made a cup finals worth him... What's that imply? Right.

Pete
07-27-2014, 10:31 PM
We got lucky but wasnt that Pittsburgh team supposed to run us over? Werent they better than us? We pulled that series out of our ass.

And if we didnt play like bitches after we were up 2-0, maybe those games go different. Canucks fans said AV coached scared against Boston too. If we are suck a different team, why did we sit back on those leads?

Pittsburgh was a better matchup that Columbus.

RangersFan
07-27-2014, 10:32 PM
Yes you have. We said to improve on Stepan, you said we just made a cup finals worth him... What's that imply? Right.

Who trades a 24 year old who has improved every season? Nobody does. If anything trade Brassard, no sane GM trades Stepan

RangersFan
07-27-2014, 10:32 PM
Pittsburgh was a better matchup that Columbus.

I agree. Chicago was a better matchup than LA too

Pete
07-27-2014, 10:33 PM
Who trades a 24 year old who has improved every season? Nobody does. If anything trade Brassard, no sane GM trades Stepan

Anyone is trade able for an upgrade. Anyone. Are you suggesting 24 year olds NEVER get traded? I assure you they do.

Pete
07-27-2014, 10:33 PM
I agree. Chicago was a better matchup than LA too

Agreed.

RangersFan
07-27-2014, 10:34 PM
Anyone is trade able for an upgrade. Anyone. Are you suggesting 24 year olds NEVER get traded? I assure you they do.

How much of an upgrade are you getting for a 24 year old? All the Stepan trade talk but nobody has told me a single player they think we can get for Stepan plus

Pete
07-27-2014, 10:35 PM
How much of an upgrade are you getting for a 24 year old? All the Stepan trade talk but nobody has told me a single player they think we can get for Stepan plus

For a team trying to win now? Spezza and Thornton were 2.

RangersFan
07-27-2014, 10:38 PM
For a team trying to win now? Spezza and Thornton were 2.

No thanks to Thornton. Spezza is declining so no thanks to him also, plus he had 1 year left on his deal. Trading young guys for old guys is a good way to fall back into the dark ages. What if we had a core like this?

St Louis 38
Hank 32
Girardi 30
Thornton 35 Spezza 31
Nash 30
Boyle 38

Just no room for improvement

Pete
07-27-2014, 10:40 PM
No thanks to Thornton. Spezza is declining so no thanks to him also, plus he had 1 year left on his deal. Trading young guys for old guys is a good way to fall back into the dark ages. What if we had a core like this?

St Louis 38
Hank 32
Girardi 30
Thornton 35 Spezza 31
Nash 30
Boyle 38

Just no room for improvement

They are both upgrades.

Drew a Penalty
07-27-2014, 10:40 PM
We got lucky but wasnt that Pittsburgh team supposed to run us over? Werent they better than us? We pulled that series out of our ass.

And if we didnt play like bitches after we were up 2-0, maybe those games go different. Canucks fans said AV coached scared against Boston too. If we are suck a different team, why did we sit back on those leads?

Who cares about what they were supposed to do? Do expectations beat teams? No. The Penguins were beat up and Fleury gave in. We were fortunate Columbus was able to beat up on them as much as they did. The comeback was impressive, but let's not act like our coming back against Pittsburgh makes us any less less lucky or any better than the Kings. The Sharks were statistically better than the Kings. Kings came back and bowled them over. They were healthy.

And as far as I know, playing like a bitch isn't a strategy employed by teams. I can't defend the team sitting back, but even when they should haven been playing defensively they got turned inside out. Kings are the better defensive team.

RangersFan
07-27-2014, 10:41 PM
They are both upgrades.

Richards was an upgrade too when we signed him. So was Gomez. How about we try to hang onto the last few young kids we have instead of trading them for 30+ centers?

RangersFan
07-27-2014, 10:42 PM
Who cares about what they were supposed to do? Do expectations beat teams? No. The Penguins were beat up and Fleury gave in. We were fortunate Columbus was able to beat up on them as much as they did. The comeback was impressive, but let's not act like our coming back against Pittsburgh makes us any less less lucky or any better than the Kings. The Sharks were statistically better than the Kings. Kings came back and bowled them over. They were healthy.

And as far as I know, playing like a bitch isn't a strategy employed by teams. I can't defend the team sitting back, but even when they should haven been playing defensively they got turned inside out. Kings are the better defensive team.

No actually we stopped playing our game after we went up 2-0 which is due to coaching and lack of cup experience and no killer instinct.

Drew a Penalty
07-27-2014, 10:44 PM
No actually we stopped playing our game after we went up 2-0 which is due to coaching and lack of cup experience and no killer instinct.

Do you think every cup winning team is filled with grizzled cup vets? They aren't. We lost because we were worse. We had plenty of luck on our side and we still couldn't win.

RangersFan
07-27-2014, 10:45 PM
Do you think every cup winning team is filled with grizzled cup vets? They aren't. We lost because we were worse. We had plenty of luck on our side and we still couldn't win.

We lost because the Kings finished and we didnt.

Drew a Penalty
07-27-2014, 10:46 PM
We lost because the Kings finished and we didnt.

And why do you think that is?

RangersFan
07-27-2014, 10:47 PM
And why do you think that is?

No PP QB, our biggest goal scorer wasnt scoring. Just couldnt get the bounces bro

Pete
07-27-2014, 10:48 PM
Richards was an upgrade too when we signed him. So was Gomez. How about we try to hang onto the last few young kids we have instead of trading them for 30+ centers?
Gomez wasn't an upgrade.

So like I said, we should never makes moves?

Kind of missing your point here.

How can we improve the team. You decide.

Mike
07-27-2014, 10:49 PM
We got lucky but wasnt that Pittsburgh team supposed to run us over? Werent they better than us? We pulled that series out of our ass.

And if we didnt play like bitches after we were up 2-0, maybe those games go different. Canucks fans said AV coached scared against Boston too. If we are suck a different team, why did we sit back on those leads?

Canucks fans also lit their city on fire after losing a hockey game.

Drew a Penalty
07-27-2014, 10:49 PM
No PP QB, our biggest goal scorer wasnt scoring. Just couldnt get the bounces bro

So then how does that not make Los Angeles the better team? See where I'm going now? Los Angeles had fully functioning scorers. We didn't. Los Angeles had a very powerplay QB. We didn't. Just because our scorers weren't working doesn't mean we can be hypothetically equal or better than Los Angeles. The Kings could come back and finish. We couldn't seal.

RangersFan
07-28-2014, 12:21 PM
So then how does that not make Los Angeles the better team? See where I'm going now? Los Angeles had fully functioning scorers. We didn't. Los Angeles had a very powerplay QB. We didn't. Just because our scorers weren't working doesn't mean we can be hypothetically equal or better than Los Angeles. The Kings could come back and finish. We couldn't seal.
Because if we scored those OT goals and won the cup people would say we were the better team. Better yet, they would say we overachieved and the Kings were still the better team. Its amazing

Pete
07-28-2014, 12:24 PM
Because if we scored those OT goals and won the cup people would say we were the better team. Better yet, they would say we overachieved and the Kings were still the better team. Its amazingBut we didn't, and no one would say we were the better team. They'd say we were an underdog who won in an upset.

Sometimes, the best team doesn't win.

Slobberknocker
07-28-2014, 12:33 PM
For a team trying to win now? Spezza and Thornton were 2.

He's right. This is New York Yankee fan mentality, where we have to sign every high priced old guy. Steps, played in the playoffs with a broken jaw and down 15 lbs. I'd take him any day of the week with that mentality.

Pete
07-28-2014, 12:37 PM
He's right. This is New York Yankee fan mentality, where we have to sign every high priced old guy. Steps, played in the playoffs with a broken jaw and down 15 lbs. I'd take him any day of the week with that mentality.

No, we don't have to sign every high priced old guy (uh, Spezza is 30). When you are on the cusp of winning, and you identify a need, you fill the need. We need to upgrade first line center. Pretty simple.

And even if it is the "Yankee" mentality, who cares? They win championships, don't they?

People get too married to guys who are just "nice" players. I'll say it again, Stepan is a phenomenal 2nd line center.

momentum
07-28-2014, 12:43 PM
But we didn't, and no one would say we were the better team. They'd say we were an underdog who won in an upset.

Sometimes, the best team doesn't win.

the truth

jsm7302
07-28-2014, 12:47 PM
No, we don't have to sign every high priced old guy (uh, Spezza is 30). When you are on the cusp of winning, and you identify a need, you fill the need. We need to upgrade first line center. Pretty simple.

And even if it is the "Yankee" mentality, who cares? They win championships, don't they?

People get too married to guys who are just "nice" players. I'll say it again, Stepan is a phenomenal 2nd line center.

With that said, I think he is a serviceable 1st line center just not top tier elite talent. Was he really centering the number 1 line? Maybe on paper but I think we were rolling 2-3 lines pretty evenly last post season.

Pete
07-28-2014, 12:52 PM
With that said, I think he is a serviceable 1st line center just not top tier elite talent. Was he really centering the number 1 line? Maybe on paper but I think we were rolling 2-3 lines pretty evenly last post season.

Yes. And the fact that there isn't a distinction is a problem. Having (2) #2 lines, a 3rd line and a 4th line can get you by, but once the playoffs and the SCF comes, you have to compete with the elite centermen in the west.

jsm7302
07-28-2014, 12:53 PM
Yes. And the fact that there isn't a distinction is a problem. Having (2) #2 lines, a 3rd line and a 4th line can get you by, but once the playoffs and the SCF comes, you have to compete with the elite centermen in the west.

Cannot debate that.

Slobberknocker
07-28-2014, 01:41 PM
No, we don't have to sign every high priced old guy (uh, Spezza is 30). When you are on the cusp of winning, and you identify a need, you fill the need. We need to upgrade first line center. Pretty simple.

And even if it is the "Yankee" mentality, who cares? They win championships, don't they?

People get too married to guys who are just "nice" players. I'll say it again, Stepan is a phenomenal 2nd line center.

the yankees won this past run because they had a good young core and could add high priced talent with out regard for a salary cap, something we can't do in hockey. that philosophy is not boding well for them this year.

i agree we need a top line center. we also needed a right handed pp qb. we got 1/2. Spezza has also been through a back surgery.

Pete
07-28-2014, 01:43 PM
the yankees won this past run because they had a good young core and could add high priced talent with out regard for a salary cap, something we can't do in hockey. that philosophy is not boding well for them this year.

i agree we need a top line center. we also needed a right handed pp qb. we got 1/2. Spezza has also been through a back surgery.

I get the risks, but there are risks with every trade.

I'm just saying, if Ottawa called and asked for Stepan, then isn't a deal-breaker for me.

Slobberknocker
07-28-2014, 02:11 PM
i respect your opinion bro. good discussion as always.

RangersFan
07-28-2014, 02:21 PM
No, we don't have to sign every high priced old guy (uh, Spezza is 30). When you are on the cusp of winning, and you identify a need, you fill the need. We need to upgrade first line center. Pretty simple.

And even if it is the "Yankee" mentality, who cares? They win championships, don't they?

People get too married to guys who are just "nice" players. I'll say it again, Stepan is a phenomenal 2nd line center.

We are not the Yankees and this isnt baseball. You dont trade Stepan to win now because there is no guarantee we win now.

RangersFan
07-28-2014, 02:21 PM
I get the risks, but there are risks with every trade.

I'm just saying, if Ottawa called and asked for Stepan, then isn't a deal-breaker for me.

Why would Ottawa ask for Stepan? Dallas got Spezza

Pete
07-28-2014, 02:51 PM
We are not the Yankees and this isnt baseball. You dont trade Stepan to win now because there is no guarantee we win now.Well, I'm not the one who brought the Yankees into it, so you can direct that comment elsewhere.

I'm sure you would have been against trading Amonte and Weight, too.


Why would Ottawa ask for Stepan? Dallas got Spezza

Clearly I was talking about before he got traded to Dallas.

RangersFan
07-28-2014, 02:53 PM
Well, I'm not the one who brought the Yankees into it, so you can direct that comment elsewhere.

I'm sure you would have been against trading Amonte and Weight, too.



Clearly I was talking about before he got traded to Dallas.

This team doesnt have a Messier, Leetch and Graves on it. Big difference.

How do you quote like that btw?

Pete
07-28-2014, 02:55 PM
This team doesnt have a Messier, Leetch and Graves on it. Big difference.

How do you quote like that btw?Yet they went to a Stanley Cup Finals without those guys...

And I don't even know what that comment is supposed to prove.

RangersFan
07-28-2014, 02:56 PM
Yet they went to a Stanley Cup Finals without those guys...

And I don't even know what that comment is supposed to prove.

What? Youre comparing 94 and now?

I mean when you quote multiple sentences in a post, how do i do that?

Pete
07-28-2014, 02:59 PM
What? Youre comparing 94 and now?

I mean when you quote multiple sentences in a post, how do i do that?

No, you are. I simply used Amonte and Weight as examples of trading young players for pieces to win a Cup.

We don't want to derail this thread further, so if you have a question about the way the forum functions, post it here: General Forum Access and Usability Issues (http://www.blueshirtsbrotherhood.com/showthread.php?7-General-Forum-Access-and-Usability-Issues)

RangersFan
07-28-2014, 03:01 PM
No, you are. I simply used Amonte and Weight as examples of trading young players for pieces to win a Cup.

We don't want to derail this thread further, so if you have a question about the way the forum functions, post it here: General Forum Access and Usability Issues (http://www.blueshirtsbrotherhood.com/showthread.php?7-General-Forum-Access-and-Usability-Issues)

The NHL 20 years ago was different from todays NHL. You need young players in this NHL who are on decent contracts. Nobody trades 24 year old 50 point centers for 35 year old centere in this NHL

Mike
07-28-2014, 03:05 PM
The NHL 20 years ago was different from todays NHL. You need young players in this NHL who are on decent contracts. Nobody trades 24 year old 50 point centers for 35 year old centere in this NHL

Spezza is 35? I thought he was younger than that.

Pete
07-28-2014, 03:06 PM
The NHL 20 years ago was different from todays NHL. You need young players in this NHL who are on decent contracts. Nobody trades 24 year old 50 point centers for 35 year old centere in this NHL

Spezza is 30.

Nick Bonino is 26 and was just traded for Ryan Kesler.

RangersFan
07-28-2014, 03:09 PM
Spezza is 30.

Nick Bonino is 26 and was just traded for Ryan Kesler.

I meant Thornton since he is still available

Slobberknocker
07-28-2014, 03:26 PM
funny thing is if Nash produced in these playoffs noone would be hard up to have a discussion on attaining a no. 1 center.

and on the record i loved the Nash signing. No one is more disappointed than me that he didn't step up this year.

The Dude
07-28-2014, 06:17 PM
No thanks to Thornton. Spezza is declining so no thanks to him also, plus he had 1 year left on his deal. Trading young guys for old guys is a good way to fall back into the dark ages. What if we had a core like this?

St Louis 38
Hank 32
Girardi 30
Thornton 35 Spezza 31
Nash 30
Boyle 38

Just no room for improvement

What happens? They become better this year and next and have a better chance at WINNING the cup while the older guys like Lundqvist, Girardi, Staal, MSL and Nash still have gas in the tank.

I'd rather keep Stepan over Brassard, but I think Stepan brings back a lot more in a package deal. Plus teams dont trade players they just signed to 5 year deals.

Stepan and Staal, could land you that first line center AND a solid prospect/young player, or a 1st round draft pick. Orrrr get the other team to eat tons of salary.

Mike
07-28-2014, 06:29 PM
This team is built to win now. They have to do whatever it takes to win while Lundqvist is still Lundqvist. No one expects them to win 3 cups in 5 years. Even if they do win 1 within the next 1-3 seasons, there is still going to be a little rebuilding within. All teams do it whether they're bad, average, or good. They all try to improve to make them more successful for the next season. It doesn't happen overnight for a lot of teams, as some are closer to winning than others. It's a cycle.

The Dude
07-28-2014, 06:36 PM
So if this team must stay as is. I guess when Stamkos goes UFA in '16, the Rangers shouldnt "Yankee it up". You know... Cause Stepan played with a broken jaw.

Mike
07-28-2014, 07:09 PM
So if this team must stay as is. I guess when Stamkos goes UFA in '16, the Rangers shouldnt "Yankee it up". You know... Cause Stepan played with a broken jaw.

Who said that?

The Dude
07-28-2014, 09:07 PM
Who said that?

Was more or less directed at those who dont think this team needs improvement, due to how far they made it last year. And those who suggest signing big names and trading for older more skilled players just shouldn't be done.

Mike
07-28-2014, 09:26 PM
Was more or less directed at those who dont think this team needs improvement, due to how far they made it last year. And those who suggest signing big names and trading for older more skilled players just shouldn't be done.

I can't understand why anyone would be against a clear upgrade at this point. This core's window will close faster than some think. Maaayyyyybe, you have 5 more shots at it, at that's stretching it a bit. And fwiw, I can't see TB letting Stamkos hit FA, but I'm all in if it happens.

Pete
07-28-2014, 09:36 PM
Stamkos probably goes to Toronto.

Mike
07-28-2014, 09:44 PM
Stamkos probably goes to Toronto.

Very possible.

Pete
07-28-2014, 09:45 PM
Very possible.

Inside track?

Mike
07-28-2014, 09:59 PM
Inside track?

If Stammer wants to come home, the guy upstairs looooooooves Canadians.

Pete
07-28-2014, 10:11 PM
Well obvi.

Mike
07-28-2014, 10:30 PM
Well obvi.

Yeah, but it's at a different level than some may expect. For example: Mike Richards > Ovechkin

James Lionel Price
07-29-2014, 01:24 AM
Gomez wasn't an upgrade.

So like I said, we should never makes moves?

Kind of missing your point here.

How can we improve the team. You decide.



If I may...they may get better due to guys like Kreider and Hagelin continuing to improve. McDonagh also. They may get better on special teams also. Brassard is entering his prime. Stepan is continuing to improve. In addition to these things hopefully happening, they can get better if some of the kids coming up can really help us.

And I am very hopeful but am also worried that not many of them are very good. if they had 2-3 rookies coming into the lineup over the next 2 years, and those guys have low cap numbers, we'd be in a position of strength in the trade market as well. That's why this kid Hayes would be great if they got him and he was good. But as is, Klein is a very valuable player on the Rangers because we can't really say any of the defensemen at Hartford are cracking this lineup. Could be that the next guy to crack the lineup (rookie) will be Skjei on the defense and he is still quite young.

Mike
07-29-2014, 06:11 AM
Hope is not a strategy. If you have a guaranteed upgrade hitting you in the face, you do it. This team has gone all-in, and is committed to winning a cup. That window will close quickly.

momentum
07-29-2014, 06:23 AM
Hope is not a strategy. If you have a guaranteed upgrade hitting you in the face, you do it. This team has gone all-in, and is committed to winning a cup. That window will close quickly.

THIS

NYR2711
07-29-2014, 08:52 AM
Hope is not a strategy. If you have a guaranteed upgrade hitting you in the face, you do it. This team has gone all-in, and is committed to winning a cup. That window will close quickly.

I agree, but if it comes down to us being a bubble team, not saying we will, but if we are, then it doesn't pay to pull that trigger with the team possibly having a new look again next year. I hate when we trade away youth to try to pull into the playoffs by trading for a rental, only to just miss getting in.

AmericanJesus
07-29-2014, 09:07 AM
Hope is not a strategy. If you have a guaranteed upgrade hitting you in the face, you do it. This team has gone all-in, and is committed to winning a cup. That window will close quickly.

The issue is that in our situation, you're not going to find a guaranteed upgrade unless you really completely mortgage the future. We can't trade Stepan ($3M) and bring back an upgrade for top line center ($7M) as we simply don't have the cap space. The only kind of upgrade we could make, in theory, would be to bring in an already cost controlled upgrade by trading equivalent salary and tons of futures. Not that this would happen, but think trading Stepan ($3M), Miller, Skjea, Duclair and a 1st when we get one again for Nathan MacKinnon ($3.75M). Of course, those kinds of deals are simply not available as Colorado likely doesn't do that deal.

Outside of that, we can't afford to bring in any of the other top center types that are reportedly available.

Maybe a little more likely is to try to upgrade the wing by moving Hagelin ($2.25M), Klein ($2.9M) and a package of our top prospects for Evander Kane ($5.25M) and then fill our 6th D spot on the cheap. But a guy like Kane is a question mark. Maybe a similar package to Ottawa for Bobby Ryan on an expiring contract. Either type of move has a downside.

The best option and the one we likely take is to do nothing now, see how camp shakes out, then carry as few spares as possible as often as possible in order to build up some prorated cap space for the trade deadline and upgrade then.

Pete
07-29-2014, 09:15 AM
But every move has a possible downside. You can't send your scraps to another team and expect an upgrade back.

Kotalik and Higgins get you Jokinen...You know?

Mike
07-29-2014, 10:01 AM
I agree, but if it comes down to us being a bubble team, not saying we will, but if we are, then it doesn't pay to pull that trigger with the team possibly having a new look again next year. I hate when we trade away youth to try to pull into the playoffs by trading for a rental, only to just miss getting in.
I was talking about before the season starts. When the deadline approaches it's a different mindset.

The issue is that in our situation, you're not going to find a guaranteed upgrade unless you really completely mortgage the future. We can't trade Stepan ($3M) and bring back an upgrade for top line center ($7M) as we simply don't have the cap space. The only kind of upgrade we could make, in theory, would be to bring in an already cost controlled upgrade by trading equivalent salary and tons of futures. Not that this would happen, but think trading Stepan ($3M), Miller, Skjea, Duclair and a 1st when we get one again for Nathan MacKinnon ($3.75M). Of course, those kinds of deals are simply not available as Colorado likely doesn't do that deal.

Outside of that, we can't afford to bring in any of the other top center types that are reportedly available.

Maybe a little more likely is to try to upgrade the wing by moving Hagelin ($2.25M), Klein ($2.9M) and a package of our top prospects for Evander Kane ($5.25M) and then fill our 6th D spot on the cheap. But a guy like Kane is a question mark. Maybe a similar package to Ottawa for Bobby Ryan on an expiring contract. Either type of move has a downside.

The best option and the one we likely take is to do nothing now, see how camp shakes out, then carry as few spares as possible as often as possible in order to build up some prorated cap space for the trade deadline and upgrade then.
Agreed. If the deal is right, it upgrades your team and needs, and it could be made, then you pull the trigger. 5 years isn't a long time, and I'm being generous with that number.

AmericanJesus
07-29-2014, 10:35 AM
But every move has a possible downside. You can't send your scraps to another team and expect an upgrade back.

Kotalik and Higgins get you Jokinen...You know?

Yes, absolutely. And other than the few young, cost controlled forwards we have that we might move (Stepan, Hagelin), the only other asset we have are a few higher end prospects that aren't anywhere near top prospects. We have some potential 2nd pair defenders, some potential 2nd/3rd pair forwards and 1 long shot top line winger (Duclair). In order to improve on Stepan, we'd probably have to package quite a bit of our future.

AmericanJesus
07-29-2014, 10:37 AM
I was talking about before the season starts. When the deadline approaches it's a different mindset.

Agreed. If the deal is right, it upgrades your team and needs, and it could be made, then you pull the trigger. 5 years isn't a long time, and I'm being generous with that number.

In our position, we have to make any deals we can to improve our club now. The ship has already sailed. We've already mortgaged the future to win now. You can't half ass it at this point. No one would be off the table (although upgrading Hank or McDonagh would be very difficult).

Mike
07-29-2014, 11:29 PM
In our position, we have to make any deals we can to improve our club now. The ship has already sailed. We've already mortgaged the future to win now. You can't half ass it at this point. No one would be off the table (although upgrading Hank or McDonagh would be very difficult).

The deal would have to be yummy if Hank, and/or McD are moved. Goalies don't fetch goal scorers.