Phil Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 5. If Pavel Buchnevich and Tony DeAngelo represent players who seemed to respond to Quinn?s tough love, then what to make of Jimmy Vesey, who recorded one point ? a goal ? over the last 19 games? Other, that is, than it is more likely the Harvard product will be somewhere else rather than in Tarrytown when training camp opens in September. https://nypost.com/2019/04/08/rangers-should-brace-themselves-for-draft-lotterys-fickle-ways/?utm_source=twitter_sitebuttons&utm_medium=site%20buttons&utm_campaign=site%20buttons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThirtyONE Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 Vesey sucks. He, Fast, and Namestnikov all do the exact same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
josh Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 One lazy-ass article, Larry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYR2711 Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 Vesey sucks. He, Fast, and Namestnikov all do the exact same thing. IMO, Fast is better than the other 2. Vesey and Namestnikov both need to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted April 9, 2019 Author Share Posted April 9, 2019 Namestnikov is the best player of the group. He's also the most expensive. Two years from now, none of them should be on the team, however. They're all placeholders. Every single one of them. This is rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYR2711 Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 Namestnikov has been a huge failure here, I hope they can get rid of him during the off season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siddious Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 I am good with getting rid of both Vesey and Names if the return is decent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 I am good with getting rid of both Vesey and Names if the return is decent. The return doesn't even matter. Getting back 6+ million in cap space is a good enough return for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siddious Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 The return doesn't even matter. Getting back 6+ million in cap space is a good enough return for me. But both have decent value.. why wouldn't you wanna capitalize on that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Future Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 Namestnikov has been a huge failure here, I hope they can get rid of him during the off season. He's only a failure if you ever thought he was going to be a 40-50 player. He is the exact player he's always been, doing what he always does. As a bottom-6 forward, he's a good player to have, depending on the price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 Namestnikov is the best player of the group. He's also the most expensive. Two years from now, none of them should be on the team, however. They're all placeholders. Every single one of them. This is rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.As long as they keep Strome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangersIn7 Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 Namestnikov won’t be here in a year, probably gone at the deadline as a rental. Only has a year left on his deal. He’s absolutely just a place holder. They took a 2 year flier on him at mid-range money. He’s not killing them, and it wasn’t a bad risk to take. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slobberknocker Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 Vesey has been a disappointment. flip him if you can. if you can surround names with more talent he'd pay off. every team needs a fast, good intangible guy, better served for the 3rd or 4th line but can be moved up in a pinch or too give a top 6 guy a breather for a night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 I'd move on from Vesey. He's super inconsistent without any huge upside. And when he goes missing, he's not helping in any other area of the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted April 9, 2019 Author Share Posted April 9, 2019 Namestnikov has been a huge failure here, I hope they can get rid of him during the off season. By what standard? If you thought he was the point producer he was with Tampa (where he was riding shotgun to Stamkos), then yeah, but that's not who he *actually* is. He's a mildly productive third-line prototype who can play up and down your lineup in a pinch. On a rebuilding team, he's the exact type of player you want grooming young prospects who will, ideally, take his job over the course of a few seasons. Same with Fast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted April 9, 2019 Author Share Posted April 9, 2019 As long as they keep Strome. Of that group of young veteran middle-six players — Strome, Vesey, Namestnikov, Fast — I keep Namestnikov over all the others. But ideally, none are around long-term. These aren't the kinds of players you invest years in beyond a handful of seasons. They're the ones you allow to groom your prospects into NHL players and then let sign regrettable UFA contracts with another team. Think Callahan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 But both have decent value.. why wouldn't you wanna capitalize on that? Define decent value. A 4th round pick for either would be well received. A 3rd on Namestnikov if another team happens to have a liking for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LONG LONG LONG TIME FAN Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 OMG. Where do people come up with some of this nonsense?? The chatter is just downright unbelievable. Life must be boring. as hell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 Of that group of young veteran middle-six players — Strome, Vesey, Namestnikov, Fast — I keep Namestnikov over all the others. But ideally, none are around long-term. These aren't the kinds of players you invest years in beyond a handful of seasons. They're the ones you allow to groom your prospects into NHL players and then let sign regrettable UFA contracts with another team. Think Callahan. Strome is night and day better than Names. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted April 9, 2019 Author Share Posted April 9, 2019 Strome is night and day better than Names. By what standard? I'm not trolling you. I'm legit asking. We both know where this is going to go, so let's get the obvious out of the way: he's a career 10% shooter shooting at more than double that (22.5) this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangersIn7 Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 They can cut bait with Vesey anytime Not enough offensively to play in top-6 Not enough defensively to play in bottom-6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
josh Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 I think Strome appears to be a better fit for this system/coach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 By what standard? I'm not trolling you. I'm legit asking. We both know where this is going to go, so let's get the obvious out of the way: he's a career 10% shooter shooting at more than double that (22.5) this season. Yea, and that's literally the one thing you keep coming back to...So if that's the only argument I'd say it's not a good enough one. Eyeballs and stats wise he's producing more than Names. He plays all 3 forward positions, is one of the few right shots we have, can play in any situation, while not great on draws is better than Names by a good bit. Put it this way, even if you don't agree he's a better player, he certainly had a better season and if I had to guess is more likely to keep it up than Names is of getting any better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RodrigueGabriel Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 As long as they keep Strome.Strome does the same thing as the other three, but he's been doing it a lot better. Sent from my [device_name] using http://Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted April 9, 2019 Author Share Posted April 9, 2019 Yea, and that's literally the one thing you keep coming back to...So if that's the only argument I'd say it's not a good enough one. Eyeballs and stats wise he's producing more than Names. He plays all 3 forward positions, is one of the few right shots we have, can play in any situation, while not great on draws is better than Names by a good bit. Put it this way, even if you don't agree he's a better player, he certainly had a better season and if I had to guess is more likely to keep it up than Names is of getting any better. Well, out of the gate, you know I'm balking at the eye test as a measure of objective reality. It's not. It's remarkably unreliable, in fact, from sports to police lineups to simple historical recollection. Our eyes/brains lie to us all the time. It's evolutionary. It's why we often see things that aren't there, from optical illusions to the fear stimulated by a shadow in the bushes. I do agree that a players' shooting percentage alone isn't enough to judge them on, but it can be a major red flag given that player's proximity to UFA. Specifically, because we've seen too many guys cash in at around the same age Strome would only to end up thrown on the historical pile of regret. His inflated shooting percentage is directly linked to a career-high in goals and yet if you took only his production with the Rangers into account, he's still pacing (0.52) around his career average (0.46) in P/GP. What happens when that percentage regresses to the mean? To me, that's a giant, flashing "buyer beware." Right-handedness and multi-positionality I'll give you. Both are big positives. But big picture, I just don't see any long-term value in keeping a guy like this around for more than another year. In fact, I'd go so far as to argue his value as a trade piece has never been higher. I'd rather sell high on the 18 goals and 33 points in 63 games player he is right now than assume that won't regress to the mean next season in his walk year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.