confirmed: Rangers Re-Sign D Brady Skjei to 6-Year/$31.5M Extension; $5.25M AAV

[Giacomin]

Pair him with Pionk permanently. Something.

[Future]

Pair him with Pionk permanently. Something.

That's what I would do, and I'd give them favorable matchups, to boot.

[Ozzy]

Ozzy, I'm with you all the way. I figure by Feb 25 we'll have a better feel of the guys and team, by June even more. It is key to evaluate a lot of these guys this year because many are on 1 and 2 year deals. I'm hardly paying attention to Skjei.

 

More interested in which kids are demonstrating potential and how are they projecting after a season with Quinn. If there are any keepers out of Hayes, Vesey, Names, Spoon. Is Kreids gonna look like the guy he did after returning last year? Is Zib a #1 or a #2? How's the coaching, development and effort? Who can play D, including the forwards? That's what has my attention.

 

I gotcha Giac! I keep finding myself believing the whole.... I get to say "Remember this team when the sucked??" :rofl:

 

Comic relief and therapy at the same time....I'll have to make it work this year! LOL

 

That's what I would do, and I'd give them favorable matchups, to boot.

 

I think that's coming soon, Future.

 

I hate to give up on Skjei...and I'm not saying you are, but he does show flashes of brilliance sometimes. It's just a big learning curve for this kid. He hasn't had the greatest coaching whilst in the NHL thus far, so I'm willing to cut him a break.

[Fatfrancesa]

No point in talking about giving up on him. It’s just another example of the rangers handing out a large contract to the wrong player though. Pretty much if they play defense the rangers should not sign for more than two years. It’s a revolving door of awful contracts and awful play. He fits perfectly.

[RJWantsTheCup]

Let Staal and either Shattenkirk or McQuaid look bad against top lines.

Have Skjei and Pionk play as a 2nd pair.

Let the vets get abused. No reason to shatter young players confidence.

[Scott]

You say that as though the context behind it supports that he, and only he, was. No one was good last year.

 

Phil I don't always buy that because the others guys are bad I have to be bad too. Talented guys should be able to shine through, especially if they have that inner drive to not suck. I think he should of shown more regardless of his team mates and imo he didn't he was part of the problem. Hopefully he picks up his game significantly but I certainly don't think it's a given.

[NYRangers723]

I actually like the skjei contract despite some fair misgivings. However the falling down has to stop. It’s already happened twice leading to goal and another time led to a breakaway that was saved by hank

[Pete]

Phil I don't always buy that because the others guys are bad I have to be bad too. Talented guys should be able to shine through, especially if they have that inner drive to not suck. I think he should of shown more regardless of his team mates and imo he didn't he was part of the problem. Hopefully he picks up his game significantly but I certainly don't think it's a given.

 

If this is your barometer, the entire team is talentless, because even last year's best Rangers were just average.

[josh]

I’d try to keep Pionk away from Skjei, for the time being.

 

Staal - Shattenkirk

Claesson - Pionk

Skjei - ADA/Smith rotates here and for Staal/Shattenkirk

[Future]

If this is your barometer, the entire team is talentless, because even last year's best Rangers were just average.

It is. This team, at best, can put together one surefire top-six line. Kreider and Zib are the only certain top-6 players on this team right now.

[Pete]

It is. This team, at best, can put together one surefire top-six line. Kreider and Zib are the only certain top-6 players on this team right now.

You live in black and white, when in reality there are a million shades of grey for all these players.

 

Too many people here trying to over-simplify and dumb down complex and nuanced conversations about developing players.

[Scott]

If this is your barometer, the entire team is talentless, because even last year's best Rangers were just average.

Pretty much.

 

Sent from my [device_name] using http://Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

[Future]

You live in black and white, when in reality there are a million shades of grey for all these players.

 

Too many people here trying to over-simplify and dumb down complex and nuanced conversations about developing players.

 

What? This team has very little talent, which is why they are rebuilding.

[Giacomin]

I’d try to keep Pionk away from Skjei, for the time being.

 

Staal - Shattenkirk

Claesson - Pionk

Skjei - ADA/Smith rotates here and for Staal/Shattenkirk

 

Well if folks want to see if how Skjei does with a decent dman and vice-versa, it's not a bad pairing at this point. Claesson is out injured. Seems McQuaid may miss time too. This is how I'd roll the next few games:

 

Skjei Pionk

Smith Shatty

Staal ADA

 

BTW, I'm OK giving Shatty easier matchups. Gotta up his trade value.

[Pete]

Pretty much.

 

Sent from my [device_name] using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

 

What? This team has very little talent, which is why they are rebuilding.

This is where grey area and nuance come in.

 

Everyone in the NHL, I don't care how "bad" you are, has talent. You're talking about the top, maybe, ~1000 players in their sport on the planet, give or take. No on on this board is top 1,000 on the planet in anything, maybe Fortnite, if I had to guess.

 

That said, if you put our top 6 players each on the top lines of other NHL teams, they'd most likely be successful. That doesn't happen without talent.

 

The problem is we lack top end talent to compete with almost every other NHL team that has at least 1 player you'd consider a star. We have no star power and that's not the same as having no talent.

 

In Skjei's case, it remains to be seen if he can put all the tools he has together on the consistent basis. If not, he'll wind up like John Moore and sit pretty on a contending team's third pair and always leave you wanting more.

 

But that's not the same as not having the talent.

[josh]

We are talking RELATIVE talent

[Stephen]

What? This team has very little talent, which is why they are rebuilding.

 

But you also have to draft well also. We had an average while the main winners were Ken Holland and Lou. When you rebuild, you need to look for players you can build around and I don't think this team has any players that we can build this team and Don't even get me started with Gorton. We need to know who we are as a team

[Stephen]

As if paying Skjei all that money will make him perform better

[Pete]

We are talking RELATIVE talent

It's not relative talent.

 

It's level of talent. We have players who can be first liners on any team but they'd be the "worst" players on those first lines.

[BrooksBurner]

This is where grey area and nuance come in.

 

Everyone in the NHL, I don't care how "bad" you are, has talent. You're talking about the top, maybe, ~1000 players in their sport on the planet, give or take. No on on this board is top 1,000 on the planet in anything, maybe Fortnite, if I had to guess.

 

That said, if you put our top 6 players each on the top lines of other NHL teams, they'd most likely be successful. That doesn't happen without talent.

 

The problem is we lack top end talent to compete with almost every other NHL team that has at least 1 player you'd consider a star. We have no star power and that's not the same as having no talent.

 

In Skjei's case, it remains to be seen if he can put all the tools he has together on the consistent basis. If not, he'll wind up like John Moore and sit pretty on a contending team's third pair and always leave you wanting more.

 

But that's not the same as not having the talent.

 

Speak for yourself. I'm a top 1000 poster on this board at bitching about the Rangers, and I haven't been actively posting for that long.

[Dunny]

Logic: Give a guy a ridiculous deal in the hope of saving about 10% cap space over six SIX years based on three months of strong play that happened 90 games before he signed the deal, but it's not his fault he was awful because everyone was awful and he's going to be just fine because he plays a lot of minutes and that's proof he's not bad, despite him being pretty much embarrassing night in and night out, then wonder why people point this out when there was zero pressure to sign said deal.

 

Wew, lad.

[Dunny]

Im not saying he's going to suck forever either, but signing that deal was ridiculous, minimal potential upside, all the potential downside imaginable.

[josh]

I really wanted that bridge.

 

And would have no* issue with him getting 7x7 in 2 years, if he earned it.

[BrooksBurner]

I'll reiterate what I said throughout this thread. It was not my preference to commit long term money to Skjei before he proved himself. I don't think a rebuilding team should be rolling dice on unproven talent like that, or you end up with junk contracts.

 

I still think it will work out fine, and at worse will be just an "average" value of a deal. Most of the issues I see with him at the start of this season are largely positional. He either gets turned around (thus falling down when trying to make up for it), or like last night where he was out of position with Toews coming in and he ran into McQuaid.

[BrooksBurner]

I really wanted that bridge.

 

And would have no* issue with him getting 7x7 in 2 years, if he earned it.

 

This would have been ideal. I would always rather pay a player what they are worth moreso than rolling the dice, especially as a rebuilding team. If this bad play becomes more of a permanent look for Skjei, the Rangers will not be able to pivot and they will have yet another traffic cone on a long term deal on the blueline.