Solid thinking. One of the aquired late 1sts Hayes and Pionk for Hamilton and a 4th liner. If not Hayes, offer Namestikov. Gotta clear cap space for JT, might as well add tona needed position in the process.Originally Posted by Mr.wiskers
Solid thinking. One of the aquired late 1sts Hayes and Pionk for Hamilton and a 4th liner. If not Hayes, offer Namestikov. Gotta clear cap space for JT, might as well add tona needed position in the process.
I dont want to trade Pionk at this point. After his impressive run this season I would like to see what we have in him first. Remember he's still 22, a lot of D-men dont blossom before long after that.
Spooner/Names/zuc, ADA, our last 1st. Dont want to give up much more then this. Maybe throw in Devils' 2nd/Boston's 3rd.
After what Pionk has done since coming in I don’t see a single reason for trading him, certainly not bundled with Hayes and a 1st for Hamilton.
You're adding cap space.
And they're trading Hamilton, now? What did I miss?
Nothing. It's speculation because they missed the playoffs.
They are not in a situation to trade "what's right" with their team. I'd be stunned if they traded him just to get into the first round. Similarly, we'd be silly to try and get him by moving our early first rounder.
Ok then Namestikov instead. Im more going on what these guys will make on the next contract. Gotta ditch these guys and get value at a needed position. Dont need Hayes or Namestikov if JT is going to be here.
Last edited by The Dude; 04-12-2018 at 07:39 PM.
Did I miss the games where Pionk did anything not average to below average? I don't think of him as anything bit a #6 or 7 guy.
Sounds like you missed all the games he played.
Pionk has arguably played his way into the top-four to start next season.
Hidden Content
"Everyone says you should be a good loser. If you’re a good loser, you’re a loser."
- John Tortorella
"I've always said, I'd rather tame a tiger than paint stripes on a kitty cat."
- Dean Lombardi
"Don't take refuge in the false security of consensus, and the feeling that whatever
you think you'e bound to be okay, because you're in the safely moral majority."
- Christopher Hitchens
Yes, arguably... Im arguing. I don't see it.
Everyone else does. Hope Rangers do..
I hope they dont.
Bring in some competition
7 spots up for grabs.
I tend to agree with you, I think he was better than the rest of the junk (Gilmour, Sproul, O'Gara, Kampfer) that was out there but I don't see the kid as a slam dunk top four on a playoff team. Imo he plays with no edge whatsoever which doesn't help with some of the other issues.
Last edited by jsrangers; 04-12-2018 at 10:02 PM.
No, but he has really good hockey sense and gains an edge by constantly learning and getting better at his position and with his stick. He has a lot to learn, but some of these college kids don't get the development they need to realize their upside. That's why we need a real coach this go around.
Pionk did demonstrated the chops and will to make this league. He has some offensive instincts that he was able to show in that crazy late season mess. But let's not pencil him into the top 4 yet. Prefer to have him on the bottom pair with an appropriate partner getting good minutes and matchups.
Josh, at first I dismissed this post thinking I'd rather give the new coach a little ammo and get him a first pair of Skjei and solid RHD. And if Staal is at Ranger camp, well he kinda has to make the team?
However, a couple of more stares at your post had me thinking. [Seth Jones interuption, he's so good]
New coach, new mentality, screw a predetermined D roster. Let everyone come in and see where the chips fall. Competition is good. Go with pairings that make sense to the new coach. Skjei will win the #1 LHD anyway and he'll go from there. If Staal is rotating 7th man, so be it. Maybe he'll expand his limited no trade list.
As long as the coach is not a dick about it and thinks he is Herb Brooks and realize there are accomplished established professionals on this team who need a different kind of coaching. Let alone holdover staff and a structured stable mgmt team. Therefore he can't be this rookie head coach playing head games like a prick.
Bottom line: This post should not be dismissed. The new coach can easily say he wants to get to know his players and worry about who slots where after preseason.
I see what you mean but no...there aren't even 5 D we have to fill 7 spots.
While he started to show more after his first 10 or so games, he started to get more icetime in the last 15 games and his stats disappeared.
He didn't seem to shoot the puck like many thought he would. He is small, but is a decent but not fast skater, and somewhat average on D. He got a lot of icetime in those last few games on a very bad team.
Im not writing him off completely. Just not going to put him in the top 4. A nice project player for the next coach. With Shattenkirk back and DeAngelo (I think) out of options, im not sure he even makes itvas the 7 spot. New coach or not, players options are always a factor.
As Giac may have been implying. Its up to the next coach.
Pionk is better than DeAngelo, that's not saying much though.
Sounds like you did.
The guy comes up from Hartford in his first year out of college. Is thrown in at the deep end in a dreadful team. Plays on the first pairing, often up against the best forwards of the opposition. Plays on the PK as well.
Puts up 14 points in 28 games. Ends the season at -1 in a team hemorrhaging goals. He's a very good skater, makes good decisions on the puck, plays with a calmness and maturity far beyond his experience level.
I'm not saying he's the next Paul Coffey but as a prospect he's clearly not below average.
Last edited by Gravesy; 04-13-2018 at 10:22 AM.
As he got more icetime he produced less. 0 points in the last seven games with top pairing minutes. I thought +/- wasn't a good stat anymore.. His give aways almost triple his take aways, he didn't score any goals, he didn't hit anyone, I wish I could make sense of the analytics, but i can imagine them being not so great. Corsi for % at 40.7, means what exactly? That the Rangers had the puck 40% of the time he's on the ice? Great. 1st pairing it is.
Im definitely not shitting on him, but im not putting him in any top 4 spot, much less the top pairing as i think I've seen suggested here,
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote