Jump to content
  • Join us — it's free!

    We are the premiere internet community for New York Rangers news and fan discussion. Don't wait — join the forum today!

IGNORED

McKenzie: "Rangers want to get better in a hurry,"


Phil

Recommended Posts

Now I’m whining for defending my point of view. So you insult me because you can’t change my mind. Seems reasonable. I’m sure if I respond in kind I will get an infraction

 

I was referring to king and Phil when I said both. And both had the same argument when shattenkirk was a ufa. Just forget that this time they are right and having a different opinion is obviously wrong headed.

 

Well you replied to me when you made the accusation. Your reply was snarky, so I responded in kind. Perhaps read your own posts back to yourself before going on about getting insulted. I think we're all here to talk out some different scenarios, especially to fill the time during a down season. I don't really care to change people's minds, but having open debates reveals new ideas that may change mine...which is why I enjoy it.

 

I will say that the Shattenkirk scenario was certainly different. They had Kevin Klein, who retired that same summer, and Dan Girardi who was a pylon and got bought out. They made a decision to trade Stepan before his NMC kicked in and use that newly found cap space to fill that RHD need. The logic was sound, but the player was not. Obviously, that one has not worked out. Shattenkirk is not and has never been in the same echelon of a player as Panarin or Karlsson. They are multiple tiers apart. This is not the same as overpaying a glorified 2nd-3rd line player and paying him like a 1st. It's paying a star like a star, and Panarin is a star. You can disagree about that point all you want, but it's certainly not an opinion based on stats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 479
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Shattenkirk is not on their level. The rangers were months from issuing a letter calling a rebuild and days from trading a top 6 center for futures. I’m on board with the Stepan move but signing shattenkirk was directly at odds with the trade. It’s lacks vision.

 

Tearing it all down to go full rebuild is at odds with signing massive long term deals to guys who will be in their mid 30’s when these young guys establish themselves as nhl players. We don’t even know which guys will pan out and where the depth of the future team will be. What will be the needs? Who knows. I’m not advocating waiting years before chasing players like panarin and ek. I’m just waiting until I get a better idea of what they have.

 

What is Andersson and Howden? Look like bottom 6 forwards to me but way to early to say. Chytil has potential but is he buchnevich three years from now still being taught lessons or is he a consistent pro? So with just those questions who are the centers here? Having to get one from the outside is going to cost big money. Three years from now the patience waiting for them will be long gone and the money will be tied up. Shestyorkin has all but been handed the net on here for the next decade plus. There is no guarantee he’s the guy. So what if you need a goalie? What does that cost? Kravtsov seems to be the safest bet and he’s a wing. Maybe he’s a star and while it would be great to have two with panarin. I’ll wait on committing to 7 year deals until I have more answers.

 

I get the argument of signing all stars at 27. But what are you adding them too? A skeleton roster of holdovers and kids you hope to develop. Macdavid and drasitl are putting up ungodly numbers in Edmonton yet what good is it. If the best player in the world can’t drag a shot roster to the playoffs why will panarin?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only answer to the core thus far is Zibanejad, panarin, ek and the young guys. The young guys are years away from being anything to rely on. Most of them aren’t even rangers yet. The ones that are are all struggling. Which is expected but what are they?

 

That's why you need quality players around them to develop them properly. Surely, we want the young guys to be part of a competing team that can grow a winning mentality? Surely, we want them learning from the absolute best in the game?

 

The biggest issue for the re-build right now is the incredible pressure on the young guys coming over. You have already seen Andersson and perhaps Buchnevich struggle with the expectations and they are going to be even greater for Shestyorkin, Kravtsov and whoever they pick this year. It would be very, very healthy for this group of young players to have some stars to lean on and to take the pressure off them a little bit.

 

Besides, no-one is suggesting that the Rangers will be competing next year, even if they add Panarin and Karlsson. Look at Ottawa this year. They have done a heavy tankjob with a superstar like Mark Stone on the roster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moreover, history suggests it's unlikely they ever will be. You can count on maybe two hands the number of truly elite-level free agents ? real needle-movers ? who've ever made free agency in the last decade. It just doesn't happen.

 

Hell, this class was supposed to be a super one. That is, until half the class re-upped. Seguin, etc.

 

 

I?m not implying to wait for the next one. I?m saying the rangers are not in a spot to invest in long term massive contracts that could come back to bite them in the ass at the exact point this team is finally turning the corner. It all could work out great you maybe right. But it can all go to shit to with the contract. My point is that taking that risk makes sense when you?re competing for a cup not when you?re trying to figure out who the fuck is your core two three years from now.

 

You advocated for another who wanted to be here. Thank god shattenkirk only got four years. I get it?s different with panarin. He?s 27 or 28 now but in khl years he?s really 22. Nobody knows how he?s going to age.

 

Ok.

Columbus 2016-2017. No panarin. 108 points

2017-2018 with panarin. 97 points

This year 81 points with roughly 12 games left

 

Not saying he made them worse but hard to say he made them better what can definitely be said is that the rangers can go forward and compete next year and beyond without him. Columbus adding panarin was much like the rangers when they added Nash. It made sense and come playoff time you want that game breaker which he is. Problem is the rangers aren?t ready to contend. When they are game breakers become available. Like Nash did for us or St. Louis. How well it worked out isn?t the point. They were there.

 

https://www.hockey-reference.com/players/p/panarar01.html

 

Lots of good thoughts in this thread, I just multiquoted a few to help collect thoughts for my post.

 

My concern is that we're going to do a half-assed rebuild. Rangers management will get impatient with sucking, first we'll go after Panarin and be a fringe playoff team, then we'll go after the MSL equivalent that has got 2 good years left, and we'll be worried that Lundqvist has a limited number of good years left, so we'll go all-in to generate a middle of the pack playoff team for a few years, then have to start over. Let's just say I'm not impressed with aspects of the organization starting with James Dolan, and the trickle-down effect on the franchise culture. Pick your favorite dynasty, or team that has been consistently good for 5-10 years... and there is an organizational philosophy that permeates from the top to the locker room, a confidence, and a 'winning culture.' Yes, 'winning culture' is a lazy phrase because you have to win in order to be identified as winners, and once you start winning Cups, everything you do is viewed as a model franchise, and there are lots of different kinds of winning cultures and team philosophies that work. But you know a winning franchise when you see it... just as you know a bad franchise when you see it.

 

Re: Panarin, sure he's a great player.

https://www.hockey-reference.com/players/p/panarar01.html

 

Not much playoff data. Is he Rick Nash or a playoff warrior? If the goal is to compete for cups, we need players that are at their best in the playoffs.

 

If the free agent market is terrible the next few years, good. Maybe the Rangers will not be tempted to be the Rangers, and will actually rebuild, instead of going the free agent route.

 

Nobody wants the Rick DiPietro contract, or a buyout situation. Just to be competitive to get Panarin, it's max contract, max years, no move. Too many contracts like that, and it hampers a GM and a franchise's ability to remake a roster. Check out what is going on with the Minnesota Wild right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And probably Kreider if they commit to this route. It's really a nice looking core for the next 5 years, at which point hopefully some of those 1st round picks and prospects develop and can take on larger roles as those other guys fall into the supporting veteran role.

 

Kreider/Zib/Panarin is a legitimate 1st line, and a good one at that. Plenty of room for the kids to fight it out on the other lines, and doesn't block anyone from ice time.

 

Totally agree, that's a 1st rate line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He looks very wingery to me.

That doesn’t make it official, to be fair.

 

I feel the same and have felt that way all along. I also think with what he's shown he's capable of in the offensive zone, why wear him down with the defensive responsibilities as a center?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed. I also think his skating, edge work and ability to shield the puck and cut in from the wing really lends itself to him playing as a winger. I’m certainly in no rush to move him to C.

 

I'm in no rush, but I would love to see him get a few games at C before the end of the season.

At this point, I think he's played enough games to understand the NHL level more, and Quinn's expectations of his play.

Chytil's best hockey is played when the puck is on his stick, and he's involved in the play. Playing on the wing, he can go through long stretches during games without touching the puck. I think moving him back to the middle will allow him puck possession opportunities that could really help his game. Most of his offense, he has created. Additionally, with the Zibanejad's successful season, and taking on a leadership role on the team, what a great mentor to have and a player with a similar skill set to emulate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...