Speculation: 2014 - 2015 New York Rangers :: Roster building / proposal thread

[Rick Nash 61]

He may well be, but I think the agenda of management right now is to build a proper team culture.

I don't know Mike personally, but the fact that we haven't signed him yet indicated to me that we won't. I believe the stories that we're probing for a trade right now.

You are probably right I did hear that same report recently.

 

[Thirty One]

I can't argue thoroughly with people whose only methodology is statistically based.

It's odd then, that you spend most of your time here doing just that. Not only in responding, but also seeking it out.

 

[Zil]

I'd answer but I genuinely don't think it'd satisfy you at all. So it becomes something of a pointless venture. It's based more on my time in a locker room than my time spent in econometrics class. I can't argue thoroughly with people whose only methodology is statistically based.

The veiled sentiment I'm getting is that we should add big bodies even if they can't actually play because they make the other players on the team feel better. Are you of the belief that players like Tanner Glass give the rest of the team the peace of mind to go out and play loose knowing they're protected?

 

[Thirty One]

The veiled sentiment I'm getting is that we should add big bodies even if they can't actually play because they make the other players on the team feel better. Are you of the belief that players like Tanner Glass give the rest of the team the peace of mind to go out and play loose knowing they're protected?

This is a view held by many. I think it's a terrible way to think of hockey players: that they somehow perform better because Tanner Glass alleviates their fear by punching faces.

 

[Fitzy]

The veiled sentiment I'm getting is that we should add big bodies even if they can't actually play because they make the other players on the team feel better. Are you of the belief that players like Tanner Glass give the rest of the team the peace of mind to go out and play loose knowing they're protected?

Why don't we ask actual NHL players, 98% of whom want to keep fighting... I guess it's for their own entertainment, because it can't possibly be that they see it as useful in any way.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-p...erwhelming-opposition-fighting-175557533.html

Twenty of 20 in that poll, and 98 percent of 318 players surveyed in the NHLPA/CBC poll. That's overwhelming support.

"It's part of hockey," one European skater said. "In my opinion, it's always good when it comes down to the emotions, when it's not a show. You understand that there's retaliation, that if somebody does something dumb, you kind of have to pay for it."

But what am I saying, the analysts have it down to a science.

 

[Zil]

Why don't we ask actual NHL players, 98% of whom want to keep fighting... I guess it's for their own entertainment, because it can't possibly be that they see it as useful in any way.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-p...erwhelming-opposition-fighting-175557533.html





But what am I saying, the analysts have it down to a science.

But this is the problem: Yes, lots of players may feel this way. But the way they feel when they're asked to think about it in no way carries over to their actual play. Some teams that fight a lot win a lot. Some teams that never fight win a lot. Some teams that fight a lot lose a lot. And some teams that never fight lose a lot. This is why the team captain isn't in charge of roster construction.

 

[BobMarleyNYR]

^ he used Dictionary.com

Hahaha

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

When will people understand that "toffnuss" is not equal to "size and versatility"?

The Brian Boyle-theory

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

It's actually pretty funny that this fan base would trade our leading goal scorer for the past 2 years for a "decent roster player"

I would trade him for depth though. We lack serious depth and with MSL, Kreider, Zucc and Stepan we have game changers in our squad. However, those 3 guys have to score goals. I would love to trade him for Nyquist and Tatar, for instance, but that won't happen.

It's better to just wait and see how he does this season. At this stage, Nash is not worth 7.8

 

[eco's bones]

FWIW Fitzy was a Div. 1 college hockey player so he'd most probably have very good impressions/insights about hockey locker rooms. Not that that matters I suppose but....I prefer his opinions to the dogmatic flow chart technocrats.

Anyway at the moment I look at Glass as what he could possibly bring--size, physical play, penalty killing. He fights but he's not really a frequent fighter so I wouldn't quite classify him as a goon. Until we actually see him in his role I'd prefer not to pre-judge him. The money might be a bit much but Moore (another 4th liner) is going to take an even larger slice of our cap space.

There are people that need to do grunt work on every team--the dirty jobs. Quite a lot of people have been lamenting how much physical play we'll lose now that Brian Boyle is not around and Glass actually outhit Boyle last year and with less ice time. It's important as well that players know their roles. Boyle was no longer happy accepting what his role on the Rangers was. I don't think we'll have a problem with Glass in this respect.

I should say on the question of Ribeiro. Locker room cancer--rather not have him. JT Miller should step up to take the 3rd line spot. Oscar Lindberg to push him. If that doesn't work--we can always make a trade during the year.

 

[Fletch]

But this is the problem: Yes, lots of players may feel this way. But the way they feel when they're asked to think about it in no way carries over to their actual play. Some teams that fight a lot win a lot. Some teams that never fight win a lot. Some teams that fight a lot lose a lot. And some teams that never fight lose a lot. This is why the team captain isn't in charge of roster construction.

the fighting debate is never-ending. It can change the complexion of a game; good and bad, obviously. It can make players feel more comfortable that liberties will not be taken on them. It can do a lot. It can also waste time by playing a guy who may not have an impact in that game - unless, of course, it's that comfort a player may feel by having that guy on his team. I can't opine to that, or really comment competently because I never played in the NHL. As it relates to Glass, which is who this all relates to - it is perplexing. I haven't poo-poohed his signing as much as most - I know little about the guy. I see a "goon" kind of player who averages a lot more than pure goon minutes and was part of a top 5 PK team; and he didn't just play token minutes. Then his stats show he sucks, yet he's stuck in this league, consistently, for 5(?) seasons, playing more than nominal minutes. It's weird. And then he's signed for, what, a 45% raise and three seasons? Weird again. What isn't weird is he's a big body, who skates hard, takes the body, and went to an Ivy league school (character guy Sather has always sought). I don't know. This one is weird.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

The veiled sentiment I'm getting is that we should add big bodies even if they can't actually play because they make the other players on the team feel better. Are you of the belief that players like Tanner Glass give the rest of the team the peace of mind to go out and play loose knowing they're protected?

For me, when it comes to bigger players, its less about toughness/a deterrent and more about giving the team a different look.

Question for you. Would you want a Mats Zuccarello clone over a guy that may have worse Corsi ratings, but can park his ass in front of the net and give you 15-20 dirty goals a season? I honestly don't know your answer because you seem to live and die by corsi.

(Please note this debate shouldn't take Tanner Glass into account who, I think we can all agree, sucks)

 

[SupersonicMonkey*]

FWIW Fitzy was a Div. 1 college hockey player so he'd most probably have very good impressions/insights about hockey locker rooms. Not that that matters I suppose but....I prefer his opinions to the dogmatic flow chart technocrats.

Anyway at the moment I look at Glass as what he could possibly bring--size, physical play, penalty killing. He fights but he's not really a frequent fighter so I wouldn't quite classify him as a goon. Until we actually see him in his role I'd prefer not to pre-judge him. The money might be a bit much but Moore (another 4th liner) is going to take an even larger slice of our cap space.

There are people that need to do grunt work on every team--the dirty jobs. Quite a lot of people have been lamenting how much physical play we'll lose now that Brian Boyle is not around and Glass actually outhit Boyle last year and with less ice time. It's important as well that players know their roles. Boyle was no longer happy accepting what his role on the Rangers was. I don't think we'll have a problem with Glass in this respect.

I should say on the question of Ribeiro. Locker room cancer--rather not have him. JT Miller should step up to take the 3rd line spot. Oscar Lindberg to push him. If that doesn't work--we can always make a trade during the year.

Agree. Yours is a more level-headed view on it.

Glass, IMO plays in Dorsett's role. And Mueller (regardless of what some will say) plays in Boyle's role (versatility, plays all forward positions, can take faceoffs, kill penalties, and provide energy).

Yes, losing Boyle hurts, and no Mueller is probably not as "good" as Boyle, but he can fill that role at a fraction of the cost (600K).

If Glass can provide the same sort of energy that Dorsett did, then it could be a decent addition for a couple hundred thousand less (Dorsett: 1.6, Glass: 1.45).

After the RFAs, there will be approx. 2 million in cap space left.

We can't have huge upgrades at every position, its just the nature of where the salary cap went this summer. Our 12th and 13th forwards and 7th defenseman will be dirt cheap. Mueller, Tarnasky, Kostka.

We will have enough cap space to add a replacement for Pouliot (I'm hoping for Stempniak due to rumors of Setoguchi to Arizona). And after that, there will be a few hundred thousand left to operate with until the deadline.

J.T. Miller is our 3rd center. Put him with Hagelin and St. Louis.

 

[Thirty One]

For me, when it comes to bigger players, its less about toughness/a deterrent and more about giving the team a different look.

Question for you. Would you want a Mats Zuccarello clone over a guy that may have worse Corsi ratings, but can park his ass in front of the net and give you 15-20 dirty goals a season? I honestly don't know your answer because you seem to live and die by corsi.

(Please note this debate shouldn't take Tanner Glass into account who, I think we can all agree, sucks)

What count more on the scoresheet: 15-20 dirty goals or 15-20 finesse goals?

I'll take 1,000 pounds of rocks.

 

[SupersonicMonkey*]

For me, when it comes to bigger players, its less about toughness/a deterrent and more about giving the team a different look.

Question for you. Would you want a Mats Zuccarello clone over a guy that may have worse Corsi ratings, but can park his ass in front of the net and give you 15-20 dirty goals a season? I honestly don't know your answer because you seem to live and die by corsi.

(Please note this debate shouldn't take Tanner Glass into account who, I think we can all agree, sucks)

Question not directed at me, but I think that is a hard one to answer. Zuccarello is strong in many areas of the ice, plays like a bulldog, is surprisingly strong on the boards, doesn't back down from bigger players, can push the pace with his skating, and can lead your team in scoring.

If i could get another guy like that, I'd be hard pressed to say no.

On the other hand, a big net presence that scores dirty goals is useful as well. Does he do anything other than that, though? Because Kreider can fill that role, but has crazy acceleration and does other things.

I think, and this is just my opinion, that J.T. Miller will add another element that we lack since Dubinsky was traded. Can play all over the ice in a variety of roles, and also play strong in front of the net.

If Glass can be a Dorsett, but obviously much larger, that could be a good thing for us.

 

[Tawnos]

What count more on the scoresheet: 15-20 dirty goals or 15-20 finesse goals?

I'll take 1,000 pounds of rocks.

To the question: When there are already 15-20 other goals on the roster that are finesse, but not dirty, the 15-20 dirty goals are more important to find in a roster addition. Teams that are built off depth, like we are (despite protestations otherwise), need versatility within that depth. It's mostly about making sure the roster is dynamic as possible, so the team can play an effective game against any opponent.

In an odd sort of way, it means that JT Miller > Brad Richards... for this team.

 

[Fletch]

To the question: When there are already 15-20 other goals on the roster that are finesse, but not dirty, the 15-20 dirty goals are more important to find in a roster addition. Teams that are built off depth, like we are (despite protestations otherwise), need versatility within that depth. It's mostly about making sure the roster is dynamic as possible, so the team can play an effective game against any opponent.

In an odd sort of way, it means that JT Miller > Brad Richards... for this team.

Perhaps it was that dirty goal guy, all else being equal, that the Rangers needed against LA. It's good to have balance in style.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

What count more on the scoresheet: 15-20 dirty goals or 15-20 finesse goals?

I'll take 1,000 pounds of rocks.

Obviously when you look at it over a macro-level during the course of the season, a goal is a goal.

What about in the playoffs when finesse is at a premium? How did Rick Nash's finesse game work out this post-season? Wouldn't you agree that theres a difference between a January night in Buffalo vs. a Stanley Cup Final game in Los Angeles in terms of how the game is played?

 

[OverTheCap]

To the question: When there are already 15-20 other goals on the roster that are finesse, but not dirty, the 15-20 dirty goals are more important to find in a roster addition. Teams that are built off depth, like we are (despite protestations otherwise), need versatility within that depth. It's mostly about making sure the roster is dynamic as possible, so the team can play an effective game against any opponent.

In an odd sort of way, it means that JT Miller > Brad Richards... for this team.

Well said. It's all about striking a balance and becoming a multi-dimensional team. This may be a skilled and speedy team but that doesn't mean all the players have to be identical.

 

[Thirty One]

FWIW Fitzy was a Div. 1 college hockey player so he'd most probably have very good impressions/insights about hockey locker rooms. Not that that matters I suppose but....I prefer his opinions to the dogmatic flow chart technocrats.

Billy Beane played major league baseball. So did Joe Morgan. One was laughed out of the game as he was unwilling to accept the fact that his lengthy time in the game didn't teach him everything he needed to know about what drove winning and losing. The other one embraced this fact, is still in the game (and thriving), and was a pioneer in moving the game away from the touch and feel method of evaluating, which as it turned out, led baseball away from what actually drove winning and losing for a long time. He recently spoke on how the distinction between insider and outsider is increasingly irrelevant.

I can't imagine how hubristic you would have to be when, in spite of what's happened in baseball in the past 20 years, you still think that your eyes and experience can tell you everything you need to know about what wins and loses hockey games. Of course this sport is special.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Billy Beane played major league baseball. So did Joe Morgan. One was laughed out of the game as he was unwilling to accept the fact that his lengthy time in the game didn't teach him everything he needed to know about what drove winning and losing. The other one embraced this fact, is still in the game (and thriving), and was a pioneer in moving the game away from the touch and feel method of evaluating, which as it turned out, led baseball away from what actually drove winning and losing for a long time. He recently spoke on how the distinction between insider and outsider is increasingly irrelevant.

I can't imagine how hubristic you would have to be when, in spite of what's happened in baseball in the past 20 years, you still think that your eyes and experience can tell you everything you need to know about what wins and loses hockey games. Of course this sport is special.

I believe hockey is quite a bit more nuanced than baseball, which is actually an individual sport masquerading as a team one.

 

[Cassano]

Fighting is irrelevant in hockey. Only sport that allows the bashing of other faces with minimal consequences.

 

[Mac n Gs]

To stimy the fighting debate a bit, I'm curious to who Gorton was referring to when they mentioned another forward could be acquired via trade. I still would like a more efficient PMD (like a Brodie or Edler) but I don't think a trade is possible.

 

[Thirty One]

I believe hockey is quite a bit more nuanced than baseball, which is actually an individual sport masquerading as a team one.

Yeah, that's the song that's oft repeated. How about basketball then?

 

[RangerBoy]

Bigger and stronger isn't always about intimidating the other team. Bigger bodies are tougher to contain. Speed is tough to contain too. Kreider brings both of those elements. The Rangers don't have many big players in their organization. Pavel Buchnevich and Keegan Iverson. Both of them are bigger players. Buchnevich looked like he really matured physically in the last year. He didn't look or play small in the WJC. The Rangers had some clips of the prospect camp scrimmages. His size and ability stood out. He had a really good year in the KHL for a 18/19 year old. Gordie Clark brought up the need of getting bigger/teams playing a heavy game when discussing Iverson. JT Miller can play a gritty game. Hopefully Buchnevich has a better year and the Rangers sign him. He will be on the Russian WJC team. Iverson is part of the US camp. He will need to have a great camp and first half to make that team. That team is loaded at forward. Bigger bodies. That's the trend.