All Encompassing Tortorella..ella..ella..eh..eh...and Glen Cigar Thread Part III

[Jersey Girl]

Dolan is a good owner.

I think Dolan is a good owner to the extent that he hires someone to run the ship, gives them as much money as they need, and stays out of the way of GM personnel decisions.

The problem is that his track record of who Dolan picks to run his teams is bad (Isiah Thomas, Glen Sather), and he remains ridiculously loyal to them regardless of their job performance.

 

[Chaels Arms]

I still don't understand why McDonagh is so rarely put on the PP. He might not be quite as good a passer as Del Zotto but he's better at handling the puck and more composed with a defender in his face. McDonagh regularly skates around defenders who go down to block his point shot which is something Del Zotto never does.

 

[schabadoo]

How far do you personally think this team will go this season?

Predicting NHL playoff results seems impossible. Outside of the NBA dictating their desired results, the postseason has become a crapshoot for the major sports. The Ravens squeaked into the playoffs, same as the Kings and the Caps.

I think the Rangers have a good chance of getting out of the first round. After that, I'd like to see the matchup.

 

[Matt Rentfree]

How far do you personally think this team will go this season?

How far can you throw an elephant?

 

[NY Lito]

I think Dolan is a good owner to the extent that he hires someone to run the ship, gives them as much money as they need, and stays out of the way of GM personnel decisions.

The problem is that his track record of who Dolan picks to run his teams is bad (Isiah Thomas, Glen Sather), and he remains ridiculously loyal to them regardless of their job performance.

This is dead on.

Aside from the **** he pulled after the Winter Classic (and I loved Torts' response) he stays the hell away from the team, which can only be a good thing.

 

[zuckera1]

For all you out there criticizing the Gaborik trade...

The team is 4-1-1 since the trade, with 2 games against Pittsburgh, 2 games against Toronto, and a game against the Islanders. Hence, 5 of the 6 games against playoff teams.

The trade will look even better once Dorsett comes back. Moore has the potential to be a top-4 defenseman in the next few years. Brassard is also young with potential. Gaborik's best days are behind him guys, Slats made the right deal given the circumstances

 

[5 4 Fighting]

Still, should have gotten a 1st round pick in a deep draft, especially after giving away a 2nd, an early 3rd, and another potential 2nd, which turns into a 5th if Clowe isn't re-upped. If we don't make a move at the draft for a 1st, consider me pissed off at the Gaborik trade. There may be another trade in the works for the draft. Why give up your 2nd and 3rd if you don't have a 1st? Horrible asset management. Lets see what happens.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Still, should have gotten a 1st round pick in a deep draft, especially after giving away a 2nd, an early 3rd, and another potential 2nd, which turns into a 5th if Clowe isn't re-upped. If we don't make a move at the draft for a 1st, consider me pissed off at the Gaborik trade. There may be another trade in the works for the draft. Why give up your 2nd and 3rd if you don't have a 1st? Horrible asset management. Lets see what happens.

Why do you crave a first round pick who probably wont be ready for at least 3-4 years so much? I've never understood that.

 

[nyranger61494]

Saw this on Flyers board:

Trying to stage a third-period comeback is futile. When leading after two periods since the 2010-11 season, the Rangers are 71-0-3, including a mark of 12-0-0 in the lockout-shortened 2013 season.

Surely, Torts' coaching has something to do with that?

 

[zuckera1]

Surely, Torts' coaching has something to do with that?

I agree, Hank along with Torts' defensive zone strategy has been money late in games when we have a lead. Give Torts credit, he knows how to burn the clock and close a game when given a 3rd period lead.

 

[The Gloaming]

Saw this on Flyers board:



Surely, Torts' coaching has something to do with that?

Unfortunately, we've lost some playoff games due to third period collapses.

 

[schabadoo]

Still, should have gotten a 1st round pick in a deep draft,

What deep draft?



--"“The 2013 draft is not as strong or as deep as we first thought,” said one scout, echoing the thoughts of many others. “It’s a deep top 10 and an OK first round, but I don’t see a lot of depth. Is it deeper than 2012? I’m not so sure.”

The 2012 draft was considered the weakest in several years. "

 

[5 4 Fighting]

Why do you crave a first round pick who probably wont be ready for at least 3-4 years so much? I've never understood that.

Why do I crave a 1st round pick in a deep draft? Hmm let me take a wild guess....maybe because this franchise hasn't had a homegrown franchise player sans Lundqvist for decades. You need to have players stepping up on ELC's, we can't have a team built through free agency, look at out struggles this year, we traded our homegrown depth Away for a superstar In his prime, we lost our depth, which we later had to replenish by trading Gaborik, a better scorer than Nash. So when you ask me why I crave a 1st round pick, it's because I want to see this organization that I've been a fan of since '99 start doing the right things to inch our way closer to another cup.

 

[Kel Varnsen]

Still, should have gotten a 1st round pick in a deep draft, especially after giving away a 2nd, an early 3rd, and another potential 2nd, which turns into a 5th if Clowe isn't re-upped. If we don't make a move at the draft for a 1st, consider me pissed off at the Gaborik trade. There may be another trade in the works for the draft. Why give up your 2nd and 3rd if you don't have a 1st? Horrible asset management. Lets see what happens.

This is such a weird HF boards meme. Should have gotten a first, as if CBJ offered a first in the package and Slats said, nah don't worry about it. Or as if CBJ would actually think, hey we've got tons of picks including the NYR 1st so lets be nice and throw in a first for them just for being them.

First round picks have value. Getting a first back in that deal would have meant not getting some of the players we got and/or having to include more departures from our side. We wanted these guys we brought back, they'll all be starting come playoff time so it's not like we could have said keep the prospect you threw in. Getting a first back would have meant this team today would be worse off. Maybe you'd be okay with that. If that's your POV start admitting to it instead of saying, "should have got a first back," like it wouldn't have cost us anything to do so.

 

[5 4 Fighting]

You would rather trade away picks that can land a good, young, and most importantly cheap player for more veterans who are on their last legs? I'm done with that experiment, and hopefully the organization understands how crucial it is to have players step up on ELC's, we don't have a very deep prospect pool as it is, always good to add to that.

 

[nyranger61494]

This is such a weird HF boards meme. Should have gotten a first, as if CBJ offered a first in the package and Slats said, nah don't worry about it. Or as if CBJ would actually think, hey we've got tons of picks including the NYR 1st so lets be nice and throw in a first for them just for being them.

First round picks have value. Getting a first back in that deal would have meant not getting some of the players we got and/or having to include more departures from our side. We wanted these guys we brought back, they'll all be starting come playoff time so it's not like we could have said keep the prospect you threw in. Getting a first back would have meant this team today would be worse off. Maybe you'd be okay with that. If that's your POV start admitting to it instead of saying, "should have got a first back," like it wouldn't have cost us anything to do so.

I like Moore and am very much okay with getting him in the deal but I have read where the Rangers had the option between him and re-acquiring our pick. I am sure someone else like Rangerboy or someone can say for sure.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Why do I crave a 1st round pick in a deep draft? Hmm let me take a wild guess....maybe because this franchise hasn't had a homegrown franchise player sans Lundqvist for decades. You need to have players stepping up on ELC's, we can't have a team built through free agency, look at out struggles this year, we traded our homegrown depth Away for a superstar In his prime, we lost our depth, which we later had to replenish by trading Gaborik, a better scorer than Nash. So when you ask me why I crave a 1st round pick, it's because I want to see this organization that I've been a fan of since '99 start doing the right things to inch our way closer to another cup.

Yes, Im sure the next Wayne Gretzky is waiting for us at #15-20 in this very deep draft (aren't they all beforehand?).

Normally, I'd agree with you, but the landscape of this team is different with Lundqvist at 31 years old. This team is going to be as far away as ever when his game dips. Theres a window to win, and its in the next few years, when Lundqvist is playing at a high level. So, *****ing about not having a 1st round pick - especially when it was given up for Rick Nash - seems awfully silly.

Heres a wild idea, how about the team focuses on developing the guys they've already drafted in the 1st round - the last 3 of which have been disappointing to varying degrees.

But yea, I know, this fictional 2013 1st rounder would've been different.

 

[5 4 Fighting]

This is such a weird HF boards meme. Should have gotten a first, as if CBJ offered a first in the package and Slats said, nah don't worry about it. Or as if CBJ would actually think, hey we've got tons of picks including the NYR 1st so lets be nice and throw in a first for them just for being them.

First round picks have value. Getting a first back in that deal would have meant not getting some of the players we got and/or having to include more departures from our side. We wanted these guys we brought back, they'll all be starting come playoff time so it's not like we could have said keep the prospect you threw in. Getting a first back would have meant this team today would be worse off. Maybe you'd be okay with that. If that's your POV start admitting to it instead of saying, "should have got a first back," like it wouldn't have cost us anything to do so.

Actually, I've read speculation that Sather was offered our 1st pick back or Moore. He chose the ready player who can contribute right away, still on the fence about that decision. How many of you guys would rather have our 1st back instead of Moore? Tough choice. I really like his mobility and size, but he is not ready to handle more than 12-14 a night in the playoffs, we still need to groom him and teach him the system.

 

[NYR Viper]

Yes, Im sure the next Wayne Gretzky is waiting for us at #15-20 in this very deep draft (aren't they all beforehand?).

Normally, I'd agree with you, but the landscape of this team is different with Lundqvist at 31 years old. This team is going to be as far away as ever when his game dips. Theres a window to win, and its in the next few years, when Lundqvist is playing at a high level. So, *****ing about not having a 1st round pick - especially when it was given up for Rick Nash - seems awfully silly.

Heres a wild idea, how about the team focuses on developing the guys they've already drafted in the 1st round - the last 3 of which have been disappointing to varying degrees.

But yea, I know, this fictional 2013 1st rounder would've been different.

Who's disappointing? McIlrath? Miller? Kreider? I don't think so. They are developing.

 

[5 4 Fighting]

Yes, Im sure the next Wayne Gretzky is waiting for us at #15-20 in this very deep draft (aren't they all beforehand?).

Normally, I'd agree with you, but the landscape of this team is different with Lundqvist at 31 years old. This team is going to be as far away as ever when his game dips. Theres a window to win, and its in the next few years, when Lundqvist is playing at a high level. So, *****ing about not having a 1st round pick - especially when it was given up for Rick Nash - seems awfully silly.

Heres a wild idea, how about the team focuses on developing the guys they've already drafted in the 1st round - the last 3 of which have been disappointing to varying degrees.

But yea, I know, this fictional 2013 1st rounder would've been different.

Good points, now that you put it that way, I can see where you're co isn't from BRB, but I still want to stock up on our prospects, how's this hypothetical situation, what if Hank goes down with a career-ending injury, and we have 0 to show for it because we were going "all in". The best franchises figure out a way to have the best of both worlds, stock up on prospects, and keep the window for a cup open. It's not always 1 or the other, it can be both. We keep our window open, while trying our best to supply Our head scouts with draft picks.

 

[5 4 Fighting]

Meant to say, I can see where you're coming from BRB, I couldn't edit my post.

 

[NYR Viper]

Good points, now that you put it that way, I can see where you're co isn't from BRB, but I still want to stock up on our prospects, how's this hypothetical situation, what if Hank goes down with a career-ending injury, and we have 0 to show for it because we were going "all in". The best franchises figure out a way to have the best of both worlds, stock up on prospects, and keep the window for a cup open. It's not always 1 or the other, it can be both. We keep our window open, while trying our best to supply Our head scouts with draft picks.

They had been doing that for years. This is really the first year they traded away their 1st rounder, no? They have stocked up on some good prospects.

 

[Kel Varnsen]

I like Moore and am very much okay with getting him in the deal but I have read where the Rangers had the option between him and re-acquiring our pick. I am sure someone else like Rangerboy or someone can say for sure.

I addressed that point directly in the second paragraph of my post.

Actually, I've read speculation that Sather was offered our 1st pick back or Moore. He chose the ready player who can contribute right away, still on the fence about that decision. How many of you guys would rather have our 1st back instead of Moore? Tough choice. I really like his mobility and size, but he is not ready to handle more than 12-14 a night in the playoffs, we still need to groom him and teach him the system.

You're exactly the type of person I was addressing as a part of the "weird HF boards meme." You hate on the trade for not bringing back a first because but you're not sure you'd be willing to lessen the package to bring back the first. Moore is starting for us right now. You want to see Gilroy or Hamrlik again? For better or worse with the Nash trade we were going all in for the now. That first round pick can't play D right now. And really as someone like myself who don't like to sell out the future for the now, Moore is a nice guy to bring back. Very young still especially for a Dman, former first round pick, and has nice size and speed. Kid looks like he can develop into a real contributor going forwards, and again unlike that first round pick he's also helping us right now.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Who's disappointing? McIlrath? Miller? Kreider? I don't think so. They are developing.

Miller was a teenager this season, so Ill give him a pass. He was just overmatched and some consistent time in the AHL will do him well.

Not really sure at all how you could classify Kreider's season anything other than disappointing.

McIlrath was a top 10 overall pick, and sure does seem earmarked to be a 3rd pairing goonish d-man. Terrible pick then, and looks to be the same now. The organization deemed Roman Hamrlik a better option, rather than giving McIlrath a shot a full 3 years after he was drafted.

Dont know how you cant admit that the latter 2 have been disappointing, like I said, to varying degrees.

 

[nyranger61494]

I addressed that point directly in the second paragraph of my post.

Got it. Misunderstood on first reading. Agree after this.