Ranger Lothbrok

You know, I hope it's not an effort thing. Because the real shame of it is, when he "wants to" he can turn it on and dominate. We've been hearing about his tremendous physical abilities since he was drafted but he just never seemed to put it all together. Like, I almost feel as though if he wanted to, he could utterly dominate every game with his shot, skating and strength. Dude's body is built for hockey the way Phelps' was built for swimming. All of this being said, he's an elder statesman on a young team, he's gonna be here for years (probably), I don't think he'll change at all with the pressure of the C, and I really, really liked the way he came to Zib's defense in the post game interview yesterday. He's probably the best option TBH.

I dunno. This reeks to me of a Lindros level fleecing.

I sincerely hope not. Winning teams don't trade for their franchise players. Eichel is pretty one dimensional. He has 8 more points than Zib and the same number of goals. That ain't worth Kakko, Laf or even Nils. We're losing because we're going, not because we don't have enough firepower.

Anyone else mildly concerned that this kid is never coming over? I think he might be happy where he is.

We kept hearing about all his "raw" tools and I was expecting him to be an unknown commodity/project several years in the making. Kid has never played a professional hockey game and is our second best d-man. And that's not a knock on the rest of them, he's just been that good. What really blows me away is that the skating is actually even better than advertised. I haven't seen a 6'5" player move like that in forever. If he's this good at 21 and as a rookie, what does his prime look like? Because right now, I'm salivating over the possibilities.

Ryan Lindgren, slapper from the point with a screen.

Is it too early for bold predictions? Brendan Lemieux claims the coveted Jesper Fast role as the "second" line's token grinder and achieves a 10 goal, 30 assist season. Because I've been so damn busy with work I haven't been active on this board in quite some time (though I check it daily), so I don't think I've said this before, but I'm a big fan of Lemieux. I think he's putting shit together, albeit slowly, and as he adjusts to the NHL pace, the things that made him an attractive trade target and well-regarded prospect will surface. This, of course, means the third line becomes a super fun Kakko-Chytil-Lafreniere combo, or some derivation thereof.

All I know is that from now on, when my phone autocorrects his first name to Lisa, I'm not gonna bother changing it. That's assuming I ever have a reason to text about him again.

Agreed. Like I mentioned just now in the draft thread, the description of his game sounds like Michael Sauer, and the clips of him playing support that. If he's even 75% of Sauer, that's a huge win in the second half of the draft. We can't just draft based on immediate need. The landscape of our defense will be totally different in three years when this kid is ready. By that point, we'll know who of Lundkvist, Jones, Robertson, Hajek, Miller, Rykov, etc. is legit, and several of them will likely have been moved to fill other needs. This kid's a throwback player (as is Lafreniere for that matter) with the skills needed to succeed in today's NHL. Low risk, pretty significant reward selection.

Schneider sounds a lot to me like Michael Sauer. If he's even 75% of that player, that's a massive win. I firmly believe that the Sauer injury (combined with the McIlrath pick over Tarasenko...how many HUGE games did we desperately need that one goal from a stud, and how many big names did we chase in free agency and trades to try to find it) cost us a Cup. Sauer made every defenseman he played with better. And being able to skate, handle the puck and play with an edge was immensely valuable. Like I said last night, happy they moved up to get him (consensus best dman still available) and I'm still happy with the pick now that Lafreniere excitement has worn off.

Yeah, I cannot envision a scenario where Lundkvist does not at least BEGIN his career in NY. He's too valuable of a prospect to let walk. I think they do whatever is necessary to get him in when he's ready.

Sooooooo this didn't go quite the way I wanted/expected, but man am I smiling looking back on this thread.

I just love that after all his time in the business, JD still has that level of drive and child-like excitement. When we win a Cup with the guys in the system right now, he'll be one of the biggest reasons why. I didn't get the hype, but I get it now. For the first time since pre-94 Neil Smith I feel like there's a plan.

Honestly? Remember when Ovie and Henrik shared the unfortunate common bond of being the best NHL players never to win it all? There would be a certain poetic aspect to him winning a Cup there, and I don't think it would bother me in the least.

Yeah, I actually really like this. Ranked higher than where we got him, Devils were probably gonna take him, and he's a safe bet to make the NHL. Plus the snarl. God I love that sandpaper. We need more of it.

We blew up the Devils game plan and they scrambled to select Meka Leka Hi Meka Hiney Ho. Should've had Jambi announce the pick as a special guest

Down the road, I could easily see us and LA going at it for the Cup once again. Looking forward to that rematch...

If you order Buffalo Wild Wings delivery, and specify extra crispy, they show up in reasonable condition.

Man, a Sergachev offer sheet would be a nice "***k you" to the JT Miller/Ryan McDonagh hosing.

To what end though? Every one of those playoff runs ended in ignominy. I still blame Dan Girardi and the refs for 2014, but where was Hank when we needed him to keep up the one goal lead with 5 minutes left? How many times over his career do we remember the other team pulling their goalie and actually tying the game as a result, even as we could never do the same? I certainly felt sick to my stomach every time we had a one goal lead with 2 minutes on the clock. I just knew the game would get tied. I never had faith we'd get the stop we needed. And yes, I know it's a team effort. A timely clearing of the puck makes all the difference in the world and likely wins the game. But I NEVER felt, even at his peak, that Henrik deserved the lable he had of being a clutch performer.

Yeah, Henrik was one of the last big pillars of my early-mid 2000s idols. I lost David Wright, then I lost Eli Manning, and Henrik was the last New York sports icon for me. It really does feel like a part of me died. I think the thing that really hit home for me is that I will never again hear at the Garden: "And in goal, Number Thirty, Heeennnnnrrriiiikkkkk Lundqvist!!!"

To be fair though, it's much, much harder to be the X-Factor that carries a team when you're a defenseman. I'd argue the nature of the position of goaltending lends itself to a GOAT argument. When you compare resumes, however, and discount the idea of carrying a team, I think it's Leetch for me by a pretty wide margin. Make no mistake, the Cup thing matters. Like, A LOT. It will forever be the blemish on Henrik's otherwise sterling career. It's not the be-all end-all of the debate, but it skews it heavily for me. RangersIn7's point about Richter's signature moments kind of makes the point aptly. Where was the Pavel Bure penalty shot stop? The robbing the Devils of a goal mere seconds before "MATTEAU MATTEAU!!!" Henrik made some big saves in the playoffs, but he also made some big whiffs. That game winning goal against Tampa in Game 7 of the ECFs in 2015 was atrocious. It was a softy from center ice. Granted, the team sucked that whole game and laid a massive egg on home ice. But Ben Bishop didn't make those mistakes. In fact, I would argue that in every playoff series we lost, it was heavily due in part to Henrik being outplayed by the other team's goalie. The Rangers turned scrubs into world-beaters (and we still do), but I can't remember a time we needed that huge save from Henrik in the playoffs and actually got it. Maybe there is actually no factual basis for this claim, and my opinion is more than likely tarnished from the past few years of the shell of Henrik in net, but for me, he was never a "big game" goalie. When it mattered most, he couldn't get it done.

I will say that my favorite "lighting money on fire" standard bet is for Broadway Brett to score. I think literally the only time it paid off was during opening night, and I also had him to get the game winner. It was a stuff-in around the net if I recall correctly. Paid pretty well. Nonsense aside, I just don't see it with the eye test. I'm not an expert, but he doesn't do anything particularly well. His skating is average or below, he's not exactly dynamite in the faceoff circle for someone that allegedly is one of our defensive circles, his shot is pedestrian, he doesn't have great vision, he doesn't play overly physical or have a decent net-front presence, etc. I'm not sure what oodles of potential I'm missing out on here.

Agree with this. I also found the rankings to be a touch out of order, overly optimistic, and frankly a total reach in some places. He projects Howden as a bottom 6 guy. Okay, great. Those are very useful and, in all honesty, we need better ones. Also projects him as a "very good NHL player." Yet he's ahead of Kravtsov who, two years ago, was ranked as one of the top prospects in the entire world (I think Hockey's Future had him as #1 actually). He's ahead of Miller who has all the hallmarks of being a sensational top-4 guy. I don't really see it. I don't know what I'm missing, or what many of us are missing for that matter, when it comes to Broadway Brett. I'm not sure I agree with us being #1 in the NHL pre-2020 draft either. Post-Lafreniere, sure, I could see it. But one guy on the special/elite bubble, and handful of high-end/very good players, and a bunch of legit NHLers? I just feel like other teams with more sensational prospects in their system belong up higher, especially when you factor in our glaring lack of center depth in the future and the lack of any serious goalie prospects to speak of, even though Igor and Georgiev just missed the cut-off age-wise for this list. I won't bitch about being #1 but I also don't see it.

Appear in court. I used to feel like a total dilettante, like I was a kid wearing his daddy's clothes and his dad's friends all thought it was funny. Found judges and basically every adversary intimidating. Got a pit in my stomach every time I saw an in-court appearance on the schedule. Felt sick driving to court every time. The more I did it, the more I realized a couple of things: (1) There's no substitute for the relationships that only come with time. The people that fare the best are the ones who are all friendly with each other. (2) Many of the adversaries are also faking it until they make it. Bluster and righteous indignation go a long way in their minds. Doesn't mean they're smart, or well-prepared. In fact, generally it's the opposite. I find the screaming and yelling hilarious now and make it a point to fuck with them. I once said to one guy, after he told me my case was going to get kicked for failure to comply with discovery and that I should just settle, "Wow...it sounds like I'm really in a pickle. What do you recommend I do?" He thought I was completely serious. I can actually take advantage of my youthful look (I'm older than I look) to portray a Bambi-like vibe and then steamroll them on the record. Most never see it coming. Some fell for it multiple times. (3) Many judges are regular people who believe they're just doing a job. Some are drunk on power, but it's not as bad as I thought. Be succinct and to the point, and nobody cares. (4) Along that same line, everyone is just doing their job. The less fixated you are with the concepts of winning and losing, the less personal it is for you. When you get home, it's time to stop thinking about it until the next morning. Also, the legal profession disproportionately both attracts and rewards mental illness.