confirmed: Rangers Re-Sign F Jimmy Vesey to 2-Year/$4.55M Extension; $2.275M AAV

[josh]

My point was in reference that 26 goals etc were not enough for a top 6 role.

As I mentioned, that would be top 6 on ANY NHL team, and top 4 on most.

 

We don’t have an Ovechkin putting up 40+, or a Karlsson. And looking at contenders, there is no way you’d take Vesey over the guys 3rd or 4th on their teams... Crosby, Stamkos, Backstrom, and those guys had elite players ahead of them. This is why you can’t compare rosters

 

And he hasn’t scored 26!

[Puck Head]

We don’t have an Ovechkin putting up 40+, or a Karlsson. And looking at contenders, there is no way you’d take Vesey over the guys 3rd or 4th on their teams... Crosby, Stamkos, Backstrom, and those guys had elite players ahead of them. This is why you can’t compare rosters

 

And he hasn’t scored 26!

 

Well it wouldn't be 3rd or 4th guy, it would the 6th guy, (going back to your original post).

We are lacking top end....not 4th-6th.

 

If you want to make your point valid. Perhaps discuss how Vesey's "ceiling" appears to be flat.

And that we'd be better suited to roll the dice on a younger more skilled yet less productive player in the top 6.

[josh]

We don’t have elite talent, so you either develop it (can’t with Vesey getting minutes) or you go for depth. And 16 goal Vesey in you top 6 isn’t depth.

[Puck Head]

We don’t have elite talent, so you either develop it (can’t with Vesey getting minutes) or you go for depth. And 16 goal Vesey in you top 6 isn’t depth.

 

I'd agree with that all day long.

At best he's a stop gap for one season, and then back down to 3rd line.

[NYR2711]

We don’t have elite talent, so you either develop it (can’t with Vesey getting minutes) or you go for depth. And 16 goal Vesey in you top 6 isn’t depth.

 

So who do you give his minutes to? Where is this mystery top 6 guy we have? You can’t develop what we don’t have.

[LONG LONG LONG TIME FAN]

Good thing I can give two fucks what you think is "OK".

 

The fuck outta here with that.

 

Wow! Gentlemanly remark. And respectful as well.

[pws85nyr]

I see him being given the opportunity to replace Miller. Better minutes, some PP and maybe PK time, and see if he can increase his production and improve his all round game like Miller. I find him a bit vanilla personally, but the contract makes perfect sense. Good AAV, short term, tradable.

 

 

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

[josh]

So who do you give his minutes to? Where is this mystery top 6 guy we have? You can?t develop what we don?t have.

 

Zibanejad, Zuccarello, hayes, Kreider, Buchnevich, Chytil, Andersson, Lettieri, Fast, Namestnikov., Spooner, potentially Meskanen, Lundqvist, Ronning.

[NYR2711]

Zibanejad, Zuccarello, hayes, Kreider, Buchnevich, Chytil, Andersson, Lettieri, Fast, Namestnikov., Spooner, potentially Meskanen, Lundqvist, Ronning.

 

You said we have to develop talent. These guys aren’t going to magically become the star player you are looking for.

[The Dude]

Kreider Zucc and Buch would probably be on the first PP....

 

Kreider - Zib - Buch - Zucc - Shatty

Vesey - Hayes - Spooner - Whoever - ADA

I really really really hate Zucc playing the point on the PP. I generally hate any forward playing the point. Most Ranger forwards that have played the point have been horrible at controlling the puck along the blue line. Often flubbing a pass to them, or holding on to it for too long. With Shattenkirk being here and Pionk and DeAngelo likely starting the season with the Rangers, I fail to see the need for a forward to be back there. If Gilmour makes the team, there your 4. Shit, I can see Staal and Skjei seeing PP time.

 

Not that I'm against putting Vesey on the PP. I just think other players will be used there before he ever gets the chance. I think they will try to squeeze as much as they can out of Namestnikov. He'll be on the PP and PK.

 

Kreider- Zib- Buch - Pionk Shattenkirk

Namestnikov- Chytil/ Spooner- Zucc - Skjei/ Staal/ Gilmour- DeAngelo

[Pete]

Complains about a forward at the point not being able to control a puck and holding it too long...

 

Suggests Staal on PP....

 

:WTF:

[Future]

I really really really hate Zucc playing the point on the PP. I generally hate any forward playing the point. Most Ranger forwards that have played the point have been horrible at controlling the puck along the blue line. Often flubbing a pass to them, or holding on to it for too long. With Shattenkirk being here and Pionk and DeAngelo likely starting the season with the Rangers, I fail to see the need for a forward to be back there. If Gilmour makes the team, there your 4. Shit, I can see Staal and Skjei seeing PP time.

 

Not that I'm against putting Vesey on the PP. I just think other players will be used there before he ever gets the chance. I think they will try to squeeze as much as they can out of Namestnikov. He'll be on the PP and PK.

 

Kreider- Zib- Buch - Pionk Shattenkirk

Namestnikov- Chytil/ Spooner- Zucc - Skjei/ Staal/ Gilmour- DeAngelo

 

He's not on the point, Shatty is at the point and if you want to say there's another point man, it'd be Zib so he can use that shot from the faceoff dot. If a PP has good movement, there really isn't going to be 2 point men.

[Long live the King]

So who do you give his minutes to? Where is this mystery top 6 guy we have? You can?t develop what we don?t have.

 

Zibanejad, Zuccarello, hayes, Kreider, Buchnevich, Chytil, Andersson, Lettieri, Fast, Namestnikov., Spooner, potentially Meskanen, Lundqvist, Ronning.

 

So you would rather put Fast, who is older and never scored more than 13 goals, in the top 6 over Vesey? You just killed your own argument.

[The Dude]

He's not on the point, Shatty is at the point and if you want to say there's another point man, it'd be Zib so he can use that shot from the faceoff dot. If a PP has good movement, there really isn't going to be 2 point men.

 

I'd rather Zib be down low and close to the net for one timers or tap ins.

 

I feel using Shattenkirk as the sole point man that pulls the trigger, leans to predictablity. You also need a guy on the other point/side to help keep the puck in. They have been atrocious at doing so for a long time now. I think part of the problem with that, is using forwards in that spot. I'd think a D man is more accustomed to keeping pucks in.

[BrooksBurner]

If guys like Chytil and Andersson aren't on the PP when we are supposed to be rebuilding and getting guys like that exposure, then something is wrong.

[NYR2711]

If guys like Chytil and Andersson aren't on the PP when we are supposed to be rebuilding and getting guys like that exposure, then something is wrong.

 

Both are centers, and Vesey is a wing, Vesey isn't taking their spots on the PP.

[Future]

If guys like Chytil and Andersson aren't on the PP when we are supposed to be rebuilding and getting guys like that exposure, then something is wrong.

 

Both are centers, and Vesey is a wing, Vesey isn't taking their spots on the PP.

Kreider - Zib - Buch - Zucc - Shatty

Vesey - Chytil - Lias - Hayes - Skjei

 

Forward positions are fairly meaningless on the PP. There's room for all of these guys.

[Future]

I'd rather Zib be down low and close to the net for one timers or tap ins.

 

I feel using Shattenkirk as the sole point man that pulls the trigger, leans to predictablity. You also need a guy on the other point/side to help keep the puck in. They have been atrocious at doing so for a long time now. I think part of the problem with that, is using forwards in that spot. I'd think a D man is more accustomed to keeping pucks in.

Most teams have one guy as the trigger man - it only becomes predictable if the other 4 don't move. The other point is manned by whoever happens to be there as motion happens. 5 guys manning one specific spot on a PP is what the Rangers have consistently done, and it's why the PP consistently sucks.

[josh]

So you would rather put Fast, who is older and never scored more than 13 goals, in the top 6 over Vesey? You just killed your own argument.

 

Fast creates room and does a lot of work that takes pressure off of linemates. I'd much rather have Fast out there supporting our youth than Vesey.

[Future]

Fast creates room and does a lot of work that takes pressure off of linemates. I'd much rather have Fast out there supporting our youth than Vesey.

So you'd play Fast in the top-6 instead of a hypothetical scoring talent, but not Vesey, who has 25-goal potential?

 

That doesn't make much sense to me.

[siddious]

Fast creates room and does a lot of work that takes pressure off of linemates. I'd much rather have Fast out there supporting our youth than Vesey.

 

I like Fast a lot but he?s the definition of a bottom 6 player.

 

If Vesey plays 82 games the way he played the last couple of last season, then I can see him reaching 25 or so.

 

Camp will tell though, if he gets out played by a younger guy then bottom 6 it is. That?s why I like this deal, if he underwhelms then he has 1 more year that can easily be moved for assets at the deadline.

 

 

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

[josh]

So you'd play Fast in the top-6 instead of a hypothetical scoring talent, but not Vesey, who has 25-goal potential?

 

That doesn't make much sense to me.

No, I dont want either in the top 6.

I'd play Fast over Vesey in every situation, though.

[Mike]

I'd rather Zib be down low and close to the net for one timers or tap ins.

 

I feel using Shattenkirk as the sole point man that pulls the trigger, leans to predictablity. You also need a guy on the other point/side to help keep the puck in. They have been atrocious at doing so for a long time now. I think part of the problem with that, is using forwards in that spot. I'd think a D man is more accustomed to keeping pucks in.

 

Most teams have one guy as the trigger man - it only becomes predictable if the other 4 don't move. The other point is manned by whoever happens to be there as motion happens. 5 guys manning one specific spot on a PP is what the Rangers have consistently done, and it's why the PP consistently sucks.

 

You’re both wrong

[Long live the King]

I'd rather Zib be down low and close to the net for one timers or tap ins.

 

I feel using Shattenkirk as the sole point man that pulls the trigger, leans to predictablity. You also need a guy on the other point/side to help keep the puck in. They have been atrocious at doing so for a long time now. I think part of the problem with that, is using forwards in that spot. I'd think a D man is more accustomed to keeping pucks in.

 

So in the beginning of the season, prior to Zib's injury, the PP was top 10 in the league. Zib had 5g and 6a, Shatty 2g and 7a, Buch 4g and 4a, Zucc 8a, Kreider 4g. I'd say that top unit was doing pretty well.

[The Dude]

If guys like Chytil and Andersson aren't on the PP when we are supposed to be rebuilding and getting guys like that exposure, then something is wrong.

 

If Chytil makes opening day roster, I fully expect him to be getting 2nd PP unit minutes over Hayes. If Hayes is here.....