RangersIn7

6 minutes ago, LindG1000 said:

Debates around Lafreniere versus Kreider may not be the issue here. Looking around the league, you can see that the 2020 draft class got railroaded by COVID game loss, and they're just figuring it out now. Stutzle and Lundell were the exceptions - and the reason is clear - they played overseas during the pandemic and didn't "lose the season" the way others did.

 

The 2020 class went off this year. Lafreniere, obviously, but Byfield, Raymond, Jarvis, Peterka, and maybe one or two others really made big impact steps forward. Then there are guys like Schneider, Guhle, Sanderson on D, and a few goalies to come, but it feels like this class was a year behind the curve.

 

 

That was definitely a big factor for all of those guys you mentioned.

1 hour ago, Pete said:

 

For them to move Kadri and not add a player that could actually defend should have gotten Dubas fired. 

 

 

For me, it's that Tavares didn't address a need. They didn't need more offense. They needed defense and/or goaltending, and players that were hard to play against because they're soft. 

 

So it's not that I disagree with your logic on the timetable, they just went after the wrong player who didn't fill a need for them. They chased the name. 

They needed a stalwart stay at home guy on D for the top-4.

They needed a high quality 2C at an affordable price.

Those adds would’ve established that “core” everyone is looking for with Toronto. 

They could’ve had both with perhaps still some money to spend. 
 

They went for the shiny thing instead of filling two premium spots and still having money and flex.

In Summer of 2018, they could’ve acquired guys like Ekholm and Trochek and still had $2.5 million to spend. 
And probably at not too bad a cost in assets either. Which they had to spend and could have done so without killing their roster. 
 

Im saying a move like that was the move.

Not 1 huge signing.

 But 2-3 lower level moves that manifest in a team that is better, deeper, and more versatile. 
 

24 minutes ago, Phil said:

Appreciate that. I'm not trying to be flippant with how short my response is, but the counter to that is simple: You can't pick and choose when elite players become available. You move when they do and you figure things out once they're secured (just like the Rangers did with Panarin when they were also shitty). I can't blame them for not seeing how this could maybe/possibly go poorly six years later when they're facing the opportunity to go Matthews-Tavares-Kadri down the middle. On paper, that's a power move. Certainly a bigger power move than not trading woefully performing, high-priced wingers when they actually had the opportunity to.

But they didn’t need a 1C with droves of offense.

Or for that matter, another premium offensive forward.

They needed a true 2C, another top-4 D, a good quality bottom-6 forward and a goalie.

And in 6 years they couldn’t get those things.

Cause they ain’t got the paper to do it.

Guess what happened 6 years ago?

Oh… that’s right…. They gave Tavares 80 million bucks to be their top C when at that point, they had some kid by the name of Matthews who in his first 140 games had 75 goals, and was at the ripe old age of 21

21 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

That same cap space would have been available to them via trade if they moved Marner (and/or Nylander).

 

I just don't really see the reason to blame it all on him given how the biggest contract players have performed. Only one has truly, deservedly, been heavily criticized for being unable to play big stakes playoff hockey. Hint: it's not Tavares.

I’m not “blaming” anything on Tavares.

Certainly not putting it all on him.

I guess I should articulate better Phil, so here goes:

Their depth has been the issue. In the bottom-6. 
But more importantly at D

And Freddie Anderson is the best goalie they’ve had in I don’t know how long. 
They’ve lacked quality players on D and depth, grit, and scoring punch in terms of guys who can really contribute in their bottom 6 for years. 
 

Tavares is a top C

But they already had a better one in Matthews 

Plus two premium wingers.

And they weren’t close 6 years ago.

Go get yourself a 2C and another top-4 D and maybe even a good bottom-6 forward for that money. Or maybe a goalie. 

They could achieve that now by moving Marner or Nylander, yes.

Im saying that the best way to build around this core 6 years ago wasn’t by adding Tavares.

It was spending that cap space differently. 
And if you’re asking for specifics, 6 years ago they had the cap space and the assets to go get many players who filled the roles they needed filled. 

15 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

The core you cited also needed to be paid. Namely Kadri and Hyman, who were direct casualties of the Tavares decision.

 

I guess I just don't understand your argument. It feels like you want to have your cake and eat it too, without ever having to actually use a single name to anchor any of it. Who were they going to pay instead of Tavares in order to get better?

I don’t know.

Neither do you.

They didn’t HAVE to pay any of them at that time.

Could’ve just let the young guys develop and go from there.

 
But with that cap space, who knows who might’ve been available to them. There’s so many possibilities 

 
Im not suggesting a specific solution or player(s).

Clearly it hasn’t worked with Tavares.

Stands to reason they might do things differently if they had another whack at that piñata  

1 hour ago, Phil said:

 

In this scenario, what you're actually asking for them to do is keep Kadri (who was routinely getting suspended in the playoffs and basically run out of town for it). There was no cache of impact centers beyond Tavares they could have tapped into instead. That years' free agent class went:

 

Tavares

Fifty feet of crap

32-year-old Paul Stastny

38-year-old Joe Thornton

32-year-old Tyler Bozak

Everyone else.

 

Would keeping Kadri and Hyman have been better for them? Maybe. Probably. But it's unfalsifiable, and Marner's playoff performance is at the forefront of why fans want him gone.

I’m not at all suggesting that they keep Kadri

Im merely suggesting that the core I cited, for the most part, would have been better served by spending that money on 2-3 players, as opposed to 1 player named Tavares. 

55 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

We're talking about two different timelines. I'm not saying they need to deal both, I'm saying they had two opportunities to "fix" this. Both times, arguably, they made the wrong call. Now they're gonna pay for it, dearly.

32 minutes ago, Morphinity 2.0 said:

In a vacuum Tavares was fine. His contract was signed with the assumption the cap was going to increase by $4M or so ever year, which was a healthy assumption. No one foresaw a flat cap for 4 years due to a pandemic shutting down the season. Even Marner and Matthews were signed before all of that, under the same assumption. 

 

As Phil said, not trading one of them to give them some breathing room is what has fucked them. 

I get the argument you fine Gents are making…. But it’s misplaced and you’re missing the bigger point.

Go back to 2018 when they signed him.

Marner

Matthews

Nylander

Reilly

Kadri

Gardner

Kapanen

Johnnson

Hyman

Freddie Andersen

All already in house.

Then they spent 80 million on JT. 
 

Instead of whacking that money up between 2-3 guys that could’ve been huge in their depth, which is what they’ve lacked.

Now they could have achieved that subsequent with a deal of Marner or Nylander.

Or they could have just not created the problem in the first place. 

37 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

This. He's old and slow. This is just what happens to guys when they get to this point. He went like half the season with eight goals, or something like that.

He’s just a secondary scorer at this point.

The whole league knows it.

 He’s playing out the string to break a record.

That’s all

Tavares was the mistake

1 hour ago, Phil said:

 

Trading Marner would have fixed that. So would have not re-signing Nylander to 11.5 million per.

 

I just don't think Tavares was ever the problem. He's still not. When they nuke this thing, he's probably going to crawl out of the rubble with the new team on a new deal making less than half of what he does now to be their veteran leader 3C.

Then they’d be out 2 premium players instead of one.

26 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

Nah, Tavares wasn't the problem. Doubling and tripling down on this core was. Marner needed to be traded after "it was 4-1." Nylander probably should have been traded this season.

 

They made their bed. Now they'll lie in it, for a long fucking time.

I don’t disagree that there are other issues

But the lack of depth has been the biggest.

That 11 million on multiple players would really help 

9 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

There's probably a strong argument to be made to this, specifically supported by the evidence they have to buy all their grit. You have to draft those players and have them come up together. Signing multiple Bertuzzis every couple years to shoehorn more physical play into your roster is a recipe for disaster. The Rangers know that all too well.

 

I don't think SJS, Ariz—Utah, and Chicago apply at all. Certainly not Utah and Chicago, who are rebuilding and, at least on paper, have the bones of a successful future in place.

 

The Leafs are a bunch of stars being subsidized by mercenary muscle who are inorganically being paid to care. That shit doesn't work. That said, it's gonna be highly, highly entertaining to watch them nuke themselves this summer.

They’d have been way better served by not signing Tavares years back, and instead putting that money in 2-3 other players that could’ve really helped them and made them deeper. 

Finish these guys tonight!

LGR!

Don’t let up and bury them tonight!

LGR!

On 4/21/2024 at 11:26 PM, Pete said:

You don't get brownie points for blind faith.  

 

He's finally showing why he was drafted number one.

To say “Finally” is unfair.

It took him 3 seasons and a whopping total of just over 200 games to figure it out at the ripe old age of 22. 

27 minutes ago, JJ in VA said:

 

I believe in KK.   Absolutely, a key to our core group.  He's certainly giving effort.   Hitting posts will translate.   KK, Laffy, Cuyle and Matty breakout series.    Jimmy V the 4th line anchor !  Ha, who saw that coming ?    Batting 500, hmmmm  HOF

Kakko is going to be just fine.

Broken record here but… Players are ready when they’re ready. 

Keep the pressure on and beat these guys!

LGR!

Just now, Br4d said:

Caps weren't particularly chippy for a team that is going to have to live on the edge if they want to beat the Rangers.

 

That's a Rempe effect.

They’re also just not too good. 

54 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

Then why were the Rangers not a playoff team before he got here? And why did a drafted group of players who never played together in Vegas make the Finals with him?

48 minutes ago, Br4d said:

 

Because podcasts...

Gallant is a mixed bag. 
Does well for a couple of seasons and loses the room and the front office.

Hes a good coach. He’s had success.

Just don’t ever see him winning a Cup. 

Bury these guys and do it quickly!

LGR!

1 hour ago, Pete said:

The president gets credit when gas is cheap and the stock market is good, even though there's nothing that he does that controls either of those things. 

 

That's about the extent I'll give GG "credit". He just happened to be here when things that probably would have happened anyway, happened to happen. 

That’s all I’m giving him credit for as well.

3 minutes ago, Long live the King said:

 

No.  GG played Zib and CK apart for over 300 minutes at 5v5 and Trocheck with so.e combe of CK, Goodrow, Vesey for 200 minutes.

 

Panarin-Trocheck-Laf were together for 866 minutes.  He literally never touched that line.  GG would have shuffled Laf around during a 3 goal in 31 game slump.

There are advantages to line shuffling at times, yes.

But it’s not usually immediate and you have to keep guys together. 

3 hours ago, Pete said:

I Don't really know how much credit he should get. He didn't change any of the lines that Quinn already had any basically just hold the players to go at and play with no plan other than "get pucks deep".

 

Like @siddioussaid, they didn't win because of him, they won despite him. 

 

And frankly, they probably would have been better if he wasn't stifling their creativity and not letting the lines have any continuity. 

 

We have a ton of evidence on record that this dude was absentee. 

If you preside over something successful, you get the credit for it.

Just like you get the blame for failure 

You can still credit the guy for something whilst pointing out his massive shortcomings 

I’ll say this though as my operative point on Gallant:

Good coach. Not a great coach.

High- level. Not a champion.

Won a lot. Ultimately lost.

Some very positive traits. Some very negative ones.

And too many issues with upper management and lack of prep/practice/engagement.

Player’s coach. Not detail oriented. 

He was a mixed bag. 
 

Right at the time. Not in 2 years though.

They knew what they hired.

Its fine.

Move on.

What they experienced under Gallant will actually help them in the long run.

 

4 minutes ago, Br4d said:

You're misunderstanding my position.  It has nothing to do with the current team.  It has everything to do with a coach who got 217 points in back-to-back seasons being the scapegoat for a GM who was in a rush to nowhere and a few vets who definitely thought they were better than they were and played like it.

 

Was GG a great coach?

 

Definitely not.

 

But you can't fire your stars.  You can fire your coach.

Ok.

Well now this group, under 2 coaches, has 150+ wins and just had the best season in Franchise history.

 So… this group has to be pretty good.

And I’d say the guy who helped put it together is pretty good too.

Not sure what the knock is on Drury or what issue you have there or why?

7 minutes ago, Br4d said:

How do you adjust to your best players taking the series off?

 

Do you really think that suddenly making changes to the Rangers plays and play pattern would have done anything when the same guys who starred during the regular season for the Rangers went missing?

 

I think you can make an argument that the Rangers weren't playing all that well despite their record.  They lost the season series to the Devils and then they lost a playoff series to the Devils and they did this based on the talent on the team and how they showed during those games.

What happened in the playoffs last year was a symptom of the things he failed to do for 2 years.

Thats just when it caught up to him.

Despite terrible series from most of their best players, the Devils still needed 7 games.

He had to make enough adjustments to find a way to win 1 game.

 He was unable to do so. 
 

Now do they still have flaws?

Yes.

But they’re better now. And it’s hit me over the head kind of obvious.

Listen to the people who cover the team.

They talk all the time about the night and day difference now.

They practice a lot.

Theyre prepared 

They have a system and structure and while some of the same problems plague them, they’ve fixed or improved upon some as well. 

If you just have no hope for this team and want to say how they have no chance with this group… 2 things then.

Stop watching
Stop posting