Targets to Break the Rangers' Homogeneity?

No doubt, brutal... but that's not what gets a player like him benched.

Lack of effort is what you're talking about, with the line changes, no? Otherwise I don't see what hustling to the bench has to do with active recovery from covid.

If anything I'd say the fact that he stuck with Zib for so long is a good message to young players. The longer/better your track record is, the longer the leash you get. So start building a good track record.

Conversely, gifting ice time based on draft position or age sends an opposite message.

This composition gives them the ability to blow teams out of the water when they're on, but eliminates their ability to win games (consistently) when Zibanejad and/or Panarin are neutralized, leaving them particularly vulnerable to relentless fore-checking teams like the Islanders, Penguins, and Hurricanes.

When he was asked about what this Rangers' team is missing during his weekly spot on the Post's 'Up in the Blueseats' podcast, Larry Brooks said this:

 

"They're too reliant on skill. They don't have enough grit in their lineup ... I'm not looking for them to get an energy player on their fourth line. I'm not looking for them to get an energy player on their third line. I'm looking for that kind of a player on their top two lines because their top two lines drive the team. They do. They're the team identity. When those guys are rolling, they're a very impressive team ... but when the Rangers run into teams that game plan against Panarin and Zibanejad and take away their time and space, the Rangers don't seem to be able to adapt. They don't have another trick up their sleeve. It's like 'we're going to beat you with talent or we're gonna lose.' It's one or the other. They don't have the ingredients to play another way."

I'd say 90% chance Strome or Buchnevich are gone this offseason. 50% chance both gone. It is clear to me the top 6 needs a complete jolt. One move isn't going to do it.

Im guessing Strome.

He's been good and I dont really want to start this conversation again, but Zib and Strome as 1-2 is incredibly soft.

Other than that and getting some grit on the 4th line, I think it will be fine. They're not really "gritty" players, but Kakko, Lafreniere and Kravtsov are all skilled players that can use the body well and play physical, but they're all still kids. Give them 1-3 years and I think they're all gonna be fine.

Then they need to get Kreider's head out of his ass and force him to play a tougher game as a 3rd liner.

If they're going to be in on Eichel or someone like that, I would put the percentages of both of them being gone much higher. But, yeah, 90% of either of them being moved is a safe bet, especially a Buchnevich who is going to be attractive to other teams as part of a center piece in a big trade.

Suspect a game like this makes the blockbuster move, possibly Eichel, much more likely. You cannot be this passive in a game like this and there not be serious consequences. Historically problem with this franchise has been players get way too comfortable here, that it's a country club. And they forget that you need to work hard to succeed. Tonight felt very much like they really thought they could slip and slide like they've done against the Devils and Sabres, play half a game and be there at the end. It's cheating.

Suspect a game like this makes the blockbuster move, possibly Eichel, much more likely. You cannot be this passive in a game like this and there not be serious consequences. Historically problem with this franchise has been players get way too comfortable here, that it's a country club. And they forget that you need to work hard to succeed. Tonight felt very much like they really thought they could slip and slide like they've done against the Devils and Sabres, play half a game and be there at the end. It's cheating.

I would've taken playing half a game last night, they might have had a chance. LOL But, yeah, they have too many assets and the need for an elite center who can win some faceoffs, for a move not to be made. I mean, they could probably get by without it because there will be some growth, but I just don't see them not doing something. I'm thinking one big move and then some smaller ones to bolster the bottom six.

We also have about $13 million in extra cap space after this season. We don't exactly HAVE to trade everyone to get players back, but I'm sure they'll make some adjustments, whether it's free agency or trade. I can't see selling the farm because of a stinker. Yeah they sucked moose dick last night, but this team is what it is, and they were shorthanded last night, without some of their most physical players against a physical team....a very good physical team at that.

No worries....

We've seen some flashes of brilliance this season, and we've also seen some flashes of "riding the porcelain bus" nights!! LOL ...This team is still being created, and we will get there. I'm not taking this one too seriously after seeing what the Isles did to us.

We're just not there yet. We will be!!!! ....just not yet! ;)

We also have about $13 million in extra cap space after this season. We don't exactly HAVE to trade everyone to get players back, but I'm sure they'll make some adjustments, whether it's free agency or trade. I can't see selling the farm because of a stinker. Yeah they sucked moose dick last night, but this team is what it is, and they were shorthanded last night, without some of their most physical players against a physical team....a very good physical team at that.

 

No worries....

 

We've seen some flashes of brilliance this season, and we've also seen some flashes of "riding the porcelain bus" nights!! LOL ...This team is still being created, and we will get there. I'm not taking this one too seriously after seeing what the Isles did to us.

 

We're just not there yet. We will be!!!! ....just not yet! ;)

I don't know Oz. This seems like more than a singular clunker of a game. Looks more like a pattern where they can't find a way to compete in these games, and it's dated back to the play in series against the Canes. This isn't even the first clunker in the last 2 weeks. They didn't show up in the other game against the Isles last week either.

I don't know Oz. This seems like more than a singular clunker of a game. Looks more like a pattern where they can't find a way to compete in these games, and it's dated back to the play in series against the Canes. This isn't even the first clunker in the last 2 weeks. They didn't show up in the other game against the Isles last week either.

Nah, you're right, man...but this team is pretty much what it is at this point, RMC. We're not built to win games like that, and last night to me was a glaring example that this is not a playoff team. We show glimpses of great things at times, but a team that's got that playoff swagger, and brings it, is gonna eat our face.

I think there are some good changes coming our way. Most likely over the off season.

It's easy to blame whomever for it, but there's no getting around the notion that this team is basically a perimeter, "fancy-Dan" team that won't drive to the net, and it's tendency is to make the extra pass, and stay out of the dirty areas.

I'm figuring if we know that, I'm sure Barry Trotz and the rest of the division has it in stone. LOL

I think the reason we're good against the bottom teams, and not against teams like the Caps, Isles, Boston and Pitt is simply because they're better. We're going to finish pretty much where we belong; Better than the bottom, but not as good as the top 4.

It's cool though, RMC...I know where you're at with your point, and you're not wrong at all. I just think we have a little more work to do, and last night was simply a disappointing reminder of how far we still need to go.

I don't know Oz. This seems like more than a singular clunker of a game. Looks more like a pattern where they can't find a way to compete in these games, and it's dated back to the play in series against the Canes. This isn't even the first clunker in the last 2 weeks. They didn't show up in the other game against the Isles last week either.

We can compete with Washington and Pitt just fine - Pitt knows how to will the wins that we don't and that comes with experience. And we usually hold toe with Carolina aside from that playoff series.

Part of me thinks this is roster makeup, part of me thinks it's inexperience, part of me thinks it's intimidation when the stakes get raised. It's probably all three.

We can compete with Washington and Pitt just fine - Pitt knows how to will the wins that we don't and that comes with experience. And we usually hold toe with Carolina aside from that playoff series.

 

Part of me thinks this is roster makeup, part of me thinks it's inexperience, part of me thinks it's intimidation when the stakes get raised. It's probably all three.

Yea but its not the kids who sucked last night

Crazy idea? Buchnevich + for either Tkachuk brother. Matt first, Brady second.

Can Matt Tkachuk play RW? I agree with you that this is guy would be near or at the top of my list, but either he or Kreider would have to play the right. I think the + with Buchnevich would be fairly considerable, Buchnevich/Lundkvist/1st package, and I would absolutely pay it. Wouldn't even think twice about it.

Can Matt Tkachuk play RW? I agree with you that this is guy would be near or at the top of my list, but either he or Kreider would have to play the right. I think the + with Buchnevich would be fairly considerable, Buchnevich/Lundkvist/1st package, and I would absolutely pay it. Wouldn't even think twice about it.

I'd rather have Brady but that's splitting hairs. Rangers would have to address cap issues with a package like that. How about Buch and Kakko for either Tkachuck?

I'd rather have Brady but that's splitting hairs. Rangers would have to address cap issues with a package like that. How about Buch and Kakko for either Tkachuck?

No, I wouldn't do that, unless more was added. I proposed a wild trade on the first page that I would do, in the event Calgary is ready to fully nuke their roster:

Buchnevich

Chytil or Strome

Kakko

Lundkvist

'21 1st

for

Lindholm

Tkachuk

Nobody responded. Pie in the sky? Maybe. I doubt Calgary would do it, but Lindholm's bargain price for 3 more seasons after this makes it achievable cap-wise for the Rangers.

Are we putting too much emphasis on our poor showing against the Islanders this year and not enough on our strong showing against the Caps?

The road of trading skill for grit is laced wit pot holes.

Are we putting too much emphasis on our poor showing against the Islanders this year and not enough on our strong showing against the Caps?

 

The road of trading skill for grit is laced wit pot holes.

Maybe. But I think an argument can be made regardless to trade for a player with both skill and grit, like either Tkachuk.

Take a flyer on Tom Wilson. Perfect size, perfect position, perfect filled need. While I get it, he may be more difficult to obtain but still. The caps have under 10m in cap space with Samsonov, possibly Chara, and Ovy to reup. They can fit since I bet Ovy takes a discount but they have very little youth or cheaper contracts. They have nearly 58 million in cap hits tied up in 12 players (without Ovy) with only 3 of those 12 being 28 or younger. And only 4m of that comes off the books before the 23/24 season.

Mantha isn’t the same but he provides some toughness and fits in well there. This could be that time where Wilson might be available and he has a partial ntc. 6 of their 8 d in rotation are 30+. We have plenty of highly touted D we could part with that are cost effective......

There's absolutely no way they trade Wilson let alone to the Rangers in their own division. They'd 100% send him West if they had to move him.

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

There's absolutely no way they trade Wilson let alone to the Rangers in their own division. They'd 100% send him West if they had to move him.

 

 

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

I don’t know. Those days of never ever doing things are lessened lately if the deal is sweet enough.

It's not that I wouldn't love a Wilson-like-object, I'm just not willing to part with the package to get him, nor do I think he really solves the problem.

No, it's not solved by one guy. It took the Leafs like 5 years to build some backbone.

No he doesn’t solve it completely but he’s a large pie e that moves the needle more than others. I don’t mind so much giving up things if it’s mostly from a D corps since we are so deep there in the prospect pool

"The problem" isn't singular. It's not remedied by a single player — even Wilson. The team is too homogeneous, so youo have to make change at multiple points. They effectively have two physical players – Trouba and Smith. One of whom is probably gone thiis summer. The next best is Lindgren, who isn't so much tough as he is Girardi-tough – the ability to absorb punishment but never dole it out.

Leafs were the same way. I took years to fix. Simmonds, Bogosian, Muzzin, Foligno, etc. all happened over multiple seasons.