Jump to content
  • Join us — it's free!

    We are the premiere internet community for New York Rangers news and fan discussion. Don't wait — join the forum today!

IGNORED

What Happens at Center?


Phil

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Wasn't Kerfoot exposed for the expansion draft? I'd like the guy for a 3C. But not at that cost. Not even for just the 3rd.

No. If we have Zibanejad and Chytil, the third C needs to have a different identity. They’re all too similar. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, josh said:

No. If we have Zibanejad and Chytil, the third C needs to have a different identity. They’re all too similar. 

I guess.

 

I think he's a bit better than Chytil defensively, seems to have a little bit more grit and can move to either wing.  Thought he was better than he is at faceoffs though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Zibanejad is a top 10 two-way C.  He's the definition of a guy you want to be able to handle any situation on the ice.

 

If the Rangers can figure out how to make him the 2C they're going to win a cup or three along the way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Br4d said:

Zibanejad is a top 10 two-way C.  He's the definition of a guy you want to be able to handle any situation on the ice.

 

If the Rangers can figure out how to make him the 2C they're going to win a cup or three along the way.

Yeah but he’s not paid like a 2C, so you need a bit more.

 

if Zibanejad played that role consistently, I’d be fine with Strome around 6m for a few seasons. But Strome, Zibanejad, not Chytil are consistent enough in their game to allow that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, josh said:

Yeah but he’s not paid like a 2C, so you need a bit more.

Capfriendly disagrees. 

 

Also if David Krejci made 7M in the last year as a 2C... Certainly $8M for a 2nd line C (close to what Draisaitl makes, too) is right on par. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Pete said:

Capfriendly disagrees. 

 

Also if David Krejci made 7M in the last year as a 2C... Certainly $8M for a 2nd line C (close to what Draisaitl makes, too) is right on par. 

 

That’s fine - if you have Bergeron making 6 or you’re the 2nd best player in the league. 
 

these are not comparables  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, josh said:

That’s fine - if you have Bergeron making 6 or you’re the 2nd best player in the league. 
 

these are not comparables  

All I'm saying is there are 2Cs making what Zib makes because there are. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ve been playing around with the roster on cap friendly and being stuck with Nemeth and Reaves contracts plus signing Kakko to somewhere between 2-2.5M, adding a back up goalie, a cheap 7th veteran defenseman and a cheap 4th line center leaves very minimal dollars for a 2nd line center (about 3.9M).   Forget trying to sign Motte.   They are almost forced to try Chytil at 2C unless Drury can move some more money around. 

Edited by RJWantsTheCup
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Long live the King said:

 

Where is this idea that Zib isn't a 1C coming from?

 

7th in points among centers over the last 3 years.

 

I didn't say he wasn't a 1C.  I said he was a top 10 two-way Center.

 

He'd be a top 3 2C in the NHL right now.  If the Rangers find another Center that can displace him from the top line it serves two purposes.

 

1.  The Rangers can set up the 2nd line to be a full two-way line with everybody good both ways. 

 

 It would allow the Rangers to match Zib up against a guy we wanted to shut down more often while also giving him more opportunities in 5v5.  Zib's maturing defensive ability goes largely unnoticed because the expectation for his line is offense, offense, offense.  Putting him on a strong two-way line in the 2 position would let the Rangers use him as a defensive weapon who was also very dangerous on the ice. 

 

2.  The 1 line with Panarin and the 1C would likely be a very high impact line that would draw attention away from Zib and Kreider.

 

One of the things that was most annoying this post-season was how the other team dedicated a topflight defensive C to trying to shut down Zib and Kreider.  This meant that the Rangers were at a disadvantage on the road when the opponent was making the last change.  Having Zib, Kreider and a two-way RW as the 2 line would take a lot of that action away from the opponent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Br4d said:

 

I didn't say he wasn't a 1C.  I said he was a top 10 two-way Center.

 

He'd be a top 3 2C in the NHL right now.  If the Rangers find another Center that can displace him from the top line it serves two purposes.

 

1.  The Rangers can set up the 2nd line to be a full two-way line with everybody good both ways. 

 

 It would allow the Rangers to match Zib up against a guy we wanted to shut down more often while also giving him more opportunities in 5v5.  Zib's maturing defensive ability goes largely unnoticed because the expectation for his line is offense, offense, offense.  Putting him on a strong two-way line in the 2 position would let the Rangers use him as a defensive weapon who was also very dangerous on the ice. 

 

2.  The 1 line with Panarin and the 1C would likely be a very high impact line that would draw attention away from Zib and Kreider.

 

One of the things that was most annoying this post-season was how the other team dedicated a topflight defensive C to trying to shut down Zib and Kreider.  This meant that the Rangers were at a disadvantage on the road when the opponent was making the last change.  Having Zib, Kreider and a two-way RW as the 2 line would take a lot of that action away from the opponent.

 

Teams already have to choose between Zib and Panarin when deploying their D.  The thing the Rangers are missing is a shutdown defensive 3rd line. 

  • Like 1
  • VINNY! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Motte, Rooney, Goodrow could’ve been played as a defensive line in the playoffs but Gallant doesn’t match lines up that way.   He just lets the guys play and hopes his lines out perform the other teams.  I almost never recall our top two lines out against the other teams 4th line but it happens to the Rangers too many times for my liking. 

  • Like 1
  • VINNY! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, RJWantsTheCup said:

Motte, Rooney, Goodrow could’ve been played as a defensive line in the playoffs but Gallant doesn’t match lines up that way.   He just lets the guys play and hopes his lines out perform the other teams.  I almost never recall our top two lines out against the other teams 4th line but it happens to the Rangers too many times for my liking. 

 

No they can't.  Rooney is an average 4th liner.  Motte is a 4th liner thats gonna throw his body around on the forecheck.  Goodrow, yes, is 1/3 of a good shutdown 3rd line.  

 

Still mad Jenner loves Columbus, Ohio.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Long live the King said:

 

Teams already have to choose between Zib and Panarin when deploying their D.  The thing the Rangers are missing is a shutdown defensive 3rd line. 

 

The teams in the playoffs this year didn't choose they just did everything they could to shut down Zib and Kreider.

 

This is one of the reasons that Panarin's performance was so meh.  When the Rangers top line got shut down the 2 line wasn't making all that much happen.  This is why the kid line stood out so much despite only being off and on from game to game.  At least things were happening when they were on the ice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Br4d said:

 

The teams in the playoffs this year didn't choose they just did everything they could to shut down Zib and Kreider.

 

This is one of the reasons that Panarin's performance was so meh.  When the Rangers top line got shut down the 2 line wasn't making all that much happen.  This is why the kid line stood out so much despite only being off and on from game to game.  At least things were happening when they were on the ice.

 

Strome was playing hurt, Panarin was a turnover machine, and Panarin-Strome-Copp still out scored the kid line at 5v5.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Long live the King said:

 

Strome was playing hurt, Panarin was a turnover machine, and Panarin-Strome-Copp still out scored the kid line at 5v5.

 

Copp, Panarin and Strome combined for 9 even strength goals in 20 games.

 

Chytil, Lafreniere and Kakko had 10 in 19 including the healthy scratch for Kakko at the end.

 

Strome and Chytil both had goals disallowed at crucial points during the run.

Edited by Br4d
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Br4d said:

 

Copp, Panarin and Strome combined for 9 even strength goals in 20 games.

 

Chytil, Lafreniere and Kakko had 10 in 19 including the healthy scratch for Kakko at the end.

 

Strome and Chytil both had goals disallowed at crucial points during the run.

 

We just ignore the goals scored by dmen with each line?  Or the matchups each line faced?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Long live the King said:

 

We just ignore the goals scored by dmen with each line?  Or the matchups each line faced?

The contributions the two lines made were very similar during the run.  The difference is that we weren't expecting a lot out of the kids so their contributions were a pleasant surprise.  We were expecting a lot of Panarin, Strome and their RW - whoever and their contributions underwhelmed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...