Gravesy

Probably. Especially if he breaks or comes close to breaking some of these team records. I saw this tweet and I started thinking about where Kreider belongs in context of Rangers legends. Weirdly, I have never really thought about him that way. Certainly, the idea of Kreiders jersey being in the rafters has never even crossed my mind. But given his production and longevity it's certainly up for debate. I think it might be because he's never been a dominant force, never truly elite and for long stretches of his career has sort of felt like unfulfilled potential given his physical gifts. Fairly or not. For those interested in the NFL, it reminds me a lot of the "is Frank Gore a HOF'er" discussion. Apart from a couple of peaks he was never the best guy around, just a really good player who was in the league and productive for much longer than your normal running back. And as a result, has incredible counting stats. I feel the same way about Kreider. Good player, great guy, excellent soldier, will be firmly cemented as one of highest scorers in org history. But I'm still having a hard time wrapping my brain around the idea of Chris Kreider, bonafide Rangers legend with his jersey retired. Maybe I'm being unfair, but I just don't think of him in the same vein as your Leetch, Graves, Hank etc.

Yeah, it was incredibly sloppy but I'm not too worried about it. The Rangers played down to their opposition a bit, and Shesterkin had an off night. A win is a win, particularly on the road on the other side of the continent. Just don't make it a habit.

Try living in Scandinavia with a normal EC puck drop at 02am you complete prima donnas

I'd be happy to be wrong on this, but I can't see how Kravtsov brings back a 1st. If you're a buyer at the deadline and presumably contending, he doesn't make your top 6. If you need depth at winger there's a myriad of guys out there with experience and proven track record who will be much more suitable additions at a fraction of the price. If you're not contending you're almost certainly not giving up a lottery 1st for the privilege of learning whether Kravtsov can hack it in the NHL. Not with this draft coming up. That's even before considering that Kravtosv and the Rangers are 100% at the end of the line of their relationship, and the Rangers have to cut their losses at this point. Any GM who gives up a 1st for him at the deadline needs their head read imo.

My first thought was: fucking great trade. My second thought was: Jerry Gallant is going to find a way to fuck this up. My money is on breaking up the kid line to put Vesey there.

Yeah. It's an absolute joke. Any type of open ice hit is a klaxon for someone to get their handbag out. By all means stand up for your team mate after a dirty hit, but come on.

Not necessarily size, I guess, but guys who are your mid six players with more complete 200ft games. I'm not sure a lack of skill was the issue v Tampa, it was more a case of not being able to hang for 60 minutes every night, in all phases of play. I definitely agree that Kane being a proven winner is tantalizing and certainly never a bad thing. I'm just not 100% convinced he's the right profile at this time. But I'm absolutely not sure of that. The upside is obviously incredible.

I don't disagree entirely. Trading for Kane feels like a move the Rangers have done a million times since the 70's, and I'm not entirely convinced it solves an actual problem. They do need a RW, but I'm not sure another light weight, technical player - albeit very talented, obviously - is what they actually need. I don't think he's necessarily wrong in that adding Kane may not be what gets the Rangers over the line when games become tight, physical and you're into war of attrition territory. On the other hand, goal scoring in general is low key becoming a bit of a problem. The question is, does adding Kane significantly improve 5v5 scoring, or is that better addressed by adding a couple of depth guys who can play as well as mix it up? I'm not sure.

The plan? The plan is to win hockey games. These boys are hockey players, they'll know what to do. Because they're vets. And if they don't, I'll sit their ass for Jimmy Fucking Vesey. Not the vets, obviously, the fucking kids. Because a message needs to be sent. Sometimes you need to do that. Send messages. Whose meaning and intent is unclear. It's called coaching. I don't know what you even mean by this "system" you speak of lol. We're a hockey team, not aerospace technicians. Let's not make it too complicated. See puck, get puck, score puck. That enough of a system for ya? These guys have played hockey all their lives, they'll figure it out. OK cya, I'm off for a beer I guess.

If the point is we don't like his demeanor that's fine. The narrative is about much more than how he looks after a fuck up though. It's him being lazy, not putting in the work and not taking it seriously. And I don't buy that narrative.

I think the idea that he doesn't take things seriously and isn't putting in the work is complete fantasy tbh. You can accuse the Rangers of many things, babying their high draft picks is not one of them. If he was goofing around and coasting through practices you'd have known about it for a long time now. That shit wouldn't have flown with David Quinn, and certainly won't fly with Gerry Gallant or his teammates either. If that was the case he'd be scratched on numerous occasions. It would also have been reported on extensively by now. I just don't buy it.

FWIW, now down to 27th on Pronmans top players under 23 list. For reference, Miller is the best Ranger at #21. Kakko is #32. The Schneids #51.

It wasn't necessary, because the point isn't whether the scouting report is accurate. It's to fucking nit pick whether he was stamped a generational talent or not coming out. As the article shows, sane individuals did not call him generational.

And what? You said he was meant to be a generational talent. I said that's not what several reports from several of what I would consider serious sources said. For example: https://theathletic.com/1713841/2020/10/06/pronmans-scouting-report-why-alexis-lafreniere-is-a-top-nhl-prospect/ Ergo, very good. Not generational. The fact he hasn't been anywhere near "very good" isn't up for discussion.

According to who? Most “serious” draft analysts had him a clear tier below McDavid/Matthews etc.

I mean, sure. It was tongue in cheek. Tried to be funny. But there are kernels of truth there too, in that the lack of patience and unwillingness to build from the ground up on Broadway probably isn’t conducive to building long lasting contending teams. Agreed.

That was my immediate thought.

Ah, yes. The vaunted New York Rangers "one cup every half century" strategy. The envy of the entire league. Look, this time last year one of the most active threads on this forum was called "Kaapo Kakko stinks". And he did. Now he doesn't. Lafreniere has already shown he can play in spurts, and can be a contributor in the playoffs. Now he's not doing so hot, but cutting bait with him would be ill advised and typical of an organization with a century + of experience in how not to build championship winning teams.

Of course not. In general though, allowing lines to build up some chemistry feels sensible. A start would be not to jumble the lines at the first hint of trouble. In particular when the team is on a roll, the lines in general are working and make sense for the first time this season. But then again, we know the only tool in GG’s bag is pressing “scramble” in his line generator app.

FAO Gerry Gallant

I don’t disagree with a lot of what you said there, but surely no one questions whether Lafreniere and Kakko are NHL players. The kids line when left alone are already a functional 2nd/3rd line in the NHL and just had a very impressive playoffs.

The eyeball test can’t tell you what he’d be as a player if the Rangers had handled him better from day 1. We just don’t know. I think it’s pretty safe to say he was never as good as everyone thought he was coming out. But is there a world where he’s a 50-60 point player by now? I strongly believe so. But of course it’s all moot because he was drafted by an org with no space or desire to accommodate and develop a young LW.

1) The Rangers will bumble on and be in and around the playoff spots as the deadline approaches. 2) They will convince themselves Pat Kane is the answer. They’ll over pay to get him, including a cost controlled young piece. This will unquestionably come back to kick them right in the cunt down the line, as said young piece turns out to be fucking good whereas Kane is playing golf/somewhere else. 3) Kane slots in on Panarin’s line, and everyone will be jerking themselves silly as that line puts up a ridiculous amount of regular season points to push the Rangers into the playoffs. 4) That line will be able to get out of their own zone a grand total of 4 times as the Rangers pond hockey boys meekly surrender 4-1 to whichever actual hockey team they face in the 1st round. Happy new year!