Page 3 of 43 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 860

Thread: 2019 Off-Season Thread: We Got This Bread, Man

  1. #41
    Senior Member Midget Division
    rmc51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    3,037
    Rep Power
    111
    Quote Originally Posted by Dunny View Post
    What are they supposed to do with their cap space? Nothing?

    Should we continue to be irrelevant for the next couple years, in an obvious effort to suck whilst sitting on 15-20 million in cap space? Is that the argument? Isn't that embarrassing? Does this hockey club and storied organization have no honour to uphold?
    No. Haven't you heard? The answer is to use the cap space on guys like Dzingel and Brandon Tanev to clog up roster space with more of the same rather than an elite player to play on the top line. Something something because signing an elite player like Panarin is "more of the same". You know, like that time we signed elite players like Gomez, Drury, and Redden....err they were elite right?

  2. #42
    Senior Member Midget Division
    4EverRangerFrank's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    3,158
    Rep Power
    62
    ^That's Rangers hockey!

  3. #43
    Senior Member Midget Division
    Kevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Central NJ
    Posts
    4,042
    Rep Power
    86
    Quote Originally Posted by Fatfrancesa View Post
    What? Havenít you heard the rangers are one signing from being in the eastern conference finals.
    Now you're sounding like a troll. No one has said that. Many disagree with your position but that doesn't mean they have delusions that the team will magically become a contender next year. I think the biggest flaw with your argument is your idea that Panarin is not elite. I'm pretty sure if you've watched him at all you would have a different idea.

  4. #44
    Senior Member Midget Division
    4EverRangerFrank's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    3,158
    Rep Power
    62
    I'm wondering if NYR really need to 'bottom-out' twice in order to have a successful rebuild. Sure, another #1 or #2 pick would be wonderful, but how realistic is that? I can see a way forward where this year's additions, plus our other moves to date (invites to camp, etc.) AND what we might get from the draft or free agency starts to build our team's ascension in the ranks. I'm not predicting a Stanley Cup next season but I'm questioning just how the addition of 'newer, better parts' can somehow keep us at or near the bottom while at the same time, not take advantage of those same newer talents? I mean at some point, you just start getting better, right?

  5. #45
    Senior Member BSBH Prospect
    So Nashty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    11,042
    Rep Power
    61
    I think next year is a lot like this year. A lot of figuring stuff out and losing in over time. Gotta think one of kravtsov, chytil, Anderson, or Kakko/Hughes has an a break out season to make up for some of the losing theyíll be doing due to lots of rookies on the team.

    Iíd say theyíre gonna have another top 10 pick for sure - luck will determine if itís any better than that. Doesnít mean the team wonít make a lot of progress next season.


    Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

  6. #46
    Senior Member Pee-Wee Division
    RangersIn7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Location
    Battle Creek MI
    Posts
    805
    Rep Power
    24
    I’m being Captain Obvious here but next season all hinges on who they get this summer and how much impact they get from the youth.

    With 1 big FA signing and mild improvements from kids they are maybe 8-10 points better. With 2 and greater improvement by the young guys they could be 15-20 points better and a lower seeded playoff team. If they get in to the playoffs then who knows. But I don’t think they’d win more than a round.

    There are merits to both of those 2 possible outcomes. Another season of 70-80 points puts them back in the lottery and gives them a higher pick in what is supposed to be a great draft class in 2020. But seeing them take a step forward and be a playoff team next year would be really nice too.

    I actually think it winds up as 1 big signing. I think that signing is Panarin. I think they improve but still suffer from the growing pains of youth and deal with roster holes as they wait on more of the help that is on the way to develop and they end up with about 85 points and a pick in the teens.

    Honestly, another season of 75ish points and a top-10 pick would be viewed as a disappointment to them internally. The organization is looking to improve this summer and to see those results manifest on the ice and in greater points.
    It is a good thing that they have those expectations. They need to be more competitive next year and not in terms of effort, in terms of results.

  7. #47
    Senior Member Bantam Division LONG LONG LONG TIME FAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    NEVER NEVER LAND
    Posts
    2,148
    Rep Power
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
    Now you're sounding like a troll. No one has said that. Many disagree with your position but that doesn't mean they have delusions that the team will magically become a contender next year. I think the biggest flaw with your argument is your idea that Panarin is not elite. I'm pretty sure if you've watched him at all you would have a different idea.
    Islanders 0f 2019 anyone? 2018; worst defense! 2019; best defense! And moving on in the play-offs. Anything is possible in sports.

  8. #48
    Banned Bantam Division
    Fatfrancesa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    1,863
    Rep Power
    0
    Signing panarin doesn’t fix the biggest problem which is the defense. Signing panarin doesn’t fix the second biggest problem, a center to play 2nd line minutes and matchups. Forcing the kids into that role can go great with somebody stepping up but it can Lso be a burden on them if it goes bad.

    For the 100th time dzingel was brought up because others needed another person to sign if not one of the big 2. I’m perfectly fine with not signing anyone. That is not trying to lose. It’s trying to avoid the cap crunch that is coming in three years.

  9. #49
    HNIC BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    79,027
    Rep Power
    584
    Quote Originally Posted by Fatfrancesa View Post
    Signing panarin doesnít fix the biggest problem which is the defense. Signing panarin doesnít fix the second biggest problem, a center to play 2nd line minutes and matchups. Forcing the kids into that role can go great with somebody stepping up but it can Lso be a burden on them if it goes bad.

    For the 100th time dzingel was brought up because others needed another person to sign if not one of the big 2. Iím perfectly fine with not signing anyone. That is not trying to lose. Itís trying to avoid the cap crunch that is coming in three years.
    If you're expecting the defense to be fixed in one swipe, it's not going to happen.

    citing a possession forward who takes the pressure off the defense will certainly help alleviate that responsibility.

  10. #50
    Senior Member Pee-Wee Division
    RangersIn7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Location
    Battle Creek MI
    Posts
    805
    Rep Power
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by Fatfrancesa View Post
    Signing panarin doesn’t fix the biggest problem which is the defense. Signing panarin doesn’t fix the second biggest problem, a center to play 2nd line minutes and matchups. Forcing the kids into that role can go great with somebody stepping up but it can Lso be a burden on them if it goes bad.

    For the 100th time dzingel was brought up because others needed another person to sign if not one of the big 2. I’m perfectly fine with not signing anyone. That is not trying to lose. It’s trying to avoid the cap crunch that is coming in three years.
    I agree

    Even with Karlsson coming in, playing 25+ minutes a night, the D still is subpar. He’s one guy on 1 pairing

  11. #51
    HNIC BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    79,027
    Rep Power
    584
    Quote Originally Posted by RangersIn7 View Post
    I agree

    Even with Karlsson coming in, playing 25+ minutes a night, the D still is subpar. Heís one guy on 1 pairing
    I think you're drastically underrating shutting down half the ice for half the game and what that does to the rest of the defense.

  12. #52
    The future is spelled K-A-K-K-O BSBH Legend
    Phil in Absentia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    88,067
    Rep Power
    496
    Signing Panarin actually does improve the defense, too. By proxy. One of the biggest issues with this defense, who are actually mostly designed to move the puck (sans Staal), is not having many forwards outside of Zibanejad capable of accepting outlet passes to spring offense.

    They still can't defend worth a shit in their own end, but the best defense is a good offense, which is accomplished via good forwards (Panarin) and a mobile, puck-moving defense (Shattenkirk, Skjei, DeAngelo, Hajek can all pass well).
    "Everyone says you should be a good loser. If youíre a good loser, youíre a loser."
    - John Tortorella


    "Never be a spectator of unfairness or stupidity. Seek out argument and disputation for their own sake; the grave will supply plenty of time for silence."
    - Christopher Hitchens

  13. #53
    Senior Member Pee-Wee Division
    RangersIn7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Location
    Battle Creek MI
    Posts
    805
    Rep Power
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    I think you're drastically underrating shutting down half the ice for half the game and what that does to the rest of the defense.
    I could be. Karlsson’s possession numbers are so strong he could provide that kind of s boost and clearly if he’s on your D, your D is better.

    But I’ll harken back to 15-20 years ago. They had Leetch in his prime. They couldn’t keep the pick out of their net. In the greatest era for defense in the game’s history.

    And shut down and Karlsson don’t really belong in the same sentence. He’s like 60 % OZS. He’s successful as a defender due to his team having the puck. He’s not deployed or thought if as a shut down guy. But you do get a similar result I suppose

  14. #54
    HNIC BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    79,027
    Rep Power
    584
    Quote Originally Posted by RangersIn7 View Post
    I could be. Karlssonís possession numbers are so strong he could provide that kind of s boost and clearly if heís on your D, your D is better.

    But Iíll harken back to 15-20 years ago. They had Leetch in his prime. They couldnít keep the pick out of their net. In the greatest era for defense in the gameís history.

    And shut down and Karlsson donít really belong in the same sentence. Heís like 60 % OZS. Heís successful as a defender due to his team having the puck. Heís not deployed or thought if as a shut down guy. But you do get a similar result I suppose
    What the game was 15 years ago is moot, really.

    Shutting down half the ice for half the game means the right side D zone rarely has the puck in it. If that's because it's always in OZone... Yea, same effect.

  15. #55
    Senior Member Pee-Wee Division
    RangersIn7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Location
    Battle Creek MI
    Posts
    805
    Rep Power
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    What the game was 15 years ago is moot, really.

    Shutting down half the ice for half the game means the right side D zone rarely has the puck in it. If that's because it's always in OZone... Yea, same effect.
    Yeah
    But it’s still a maybe to me in some respect. And it’s a fair comparison even if the game is different.
    Leetch in 1999 is comparable to what Karlsson is in 2019.
    Having Leetch in that era still resulted in the Rangers being poor defensively

    Would you be shocked if the Rangers signed Karlsson and still were bottom third of league in goals against?
    I wouldn’t

    There’s still half of 1 pair and 2 other full pairs that can be exploited.
    Last edited by RangersIn7; 04-20-2019 at 09:35 PM.

  16. #56
    HNIC BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    79,027
    Rep Power
    584
    Quote Originally Posted by RangersIn7 View Post
    Yeah
    But itís still a maybe to me in some respect. And itís a fair comparison even if the game is different.
    Leetch in 1999 is comparable to what Karlsson is in 2019.
    Having Leetch in that era still resulted in the Rangers being poor defensively

    Would you be shocked if the Rangers signed Karlsson and still were bottom third of league in goals against?
    I wouldnít

    Thereís still half of 1 pair and 2 other full pairs that can be exploited.
    Actually, I would be.


    You have the puck alot longer with Karlsson than with anyone else on our D.

  17. #57
    Senior Member Pee-Wee Division
    RangersIn7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Location
    Battle Creek MI
    Posts
    805
    Rep Power
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    Actually, I would be.


    You have the puck alot longer with Karlsson than with anyone else on our D.
    Ok

    I’m a little surprised at that

    I think middle of the league at best, but probably around 21-23.

    I’m just concerned on 7 years of Karlsson
    For 5 years I’d be all over him. But I can’t see that happening unless he has a burning desire to play in NY or Hank can convince him. Someone will throw 7 years and huge money at him, and it will be hard for him to pass that up

  18. #58
    HNIC BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    79,027
    Rep Power
    584
    Quote Originally Posted by RangersIn7 View Post
    Ok

    Iím a little surprised at that

    I think middle of the league at best, but probably around 21-23.

    Iím just concerned on 7 years of Karlsson
    For 5 years Iíd be all over him. But I canít see that happening unless he has a burning desire to play in NY or Hank can convince him. Someone will throw 7 years and huge money at him, and it will be hard for him to pass that up
    If he thinks he can blend in off ice in NY, I think he comes.

    If SJ is gonna pay him, he'll stay. He's been through a lot. I think he wants to go to a "normal" city. No way he goes anywhere in Canada or where hockey is the center of attention.

  19. #59
    Senior Member Pee-Wee Division
    RangersIn7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Location
    Battle Creek MI
    Posts
    805
    Rep Power
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    If he thinks he can blend in off ice in NY, I think he comes.

    If SJ is gonna pay him, he'll stay. He's been through a lot. I think he wants to go to a "normal" city. No way he goes anywhere in Canada or where hockey is the center of attention.
    I agree with that
    I think it’s SJ, NY, or TB as most likely destinations

    My big question though is if the Rangers won’t go 7 years, on which who knows how they feel about that as it relates to him, and they only go as high as 5, is that a non-starter for him?
    Last edited by RangersIn7; 04-20-2019 at 11:15 PM.

  20. #60
    Senior Member Midget Division
    rmc51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    3,037
    Rep Power
    111
    Quote Originally Posted by RangersIn7 View Post
    I agree with that
    I think it’s SJ, NY, or TB as most likely destinations

    My big question though is if the Rangers won’t go 7 years, on which who knows how they feel about that as it relates to him, and they only go as high as 5, is that a non-starter for him?
    He'd have to really love New York to pass on 20 something million dollars.

Page 3 of 43 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •