Speculation: Did Losing Dubinsky and Prust Crush the Rangers

[Orr Nightmare]

Dubinsky, no. Prust, yes.

Everyone ***** on Dubi...he has 20 points this year...he would be our leading scorer and a guy who loved being a Ranger....seriously, the majority of the people who come on these boards have no idea

 

[smoneil]

Read the post above yours, not comparing them

Yup, my bad. I was in mid post when it went up (I hit reply and then went to double check the exact difference in production through 26). No worries.

 

[smoneil]

Everyone ***** on Dubi...he has 20 points this year...he would be our leading scorer and a guy who loved being a Ranger....seriously, the majority of the people who come on these boards have no idea

While I agree with the sentiment (Dubi would be better than Brass, and would give us a good FO man at the dot), he only has 15 points this year (in 21 games--he's been on the IR a couple of times).

Frankly, that's another consideration with guys like Dubi and Cally--both players have spent considerable time on the IR. Will they end up dropping off a cliff at a relatively young age like Drury did due to their style of play? That's something worth considering when they craft their contract offer to Callahan (I'm more worried about the term than I am about the dollars).

 

[Hunter Gathers]

No .

 

[mike14]

Did losing Dubi and Prust gut the Rangers? No.

Did losing Dubi, AA, Prust, Feds and Prospal while only bringing in Nash as an adequate replacement gut the Rangers? Hell yes

Losing 5 of your top 9 is a sure fire way to lose a team identity.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

Did losing Dubi and Prust gut the Rangers? No.

Did losing Dubi, AA, Prust, Feds and Prospal while only bringing in Nash as an adequate replacement gut the Rangers? Hell yes

Losing 5 of your top 9 is a sure fire way to lose a team identity.

Did Brassard die?

 

[smoneil]

Did Brassard die?

The Brassard trade was half a year later, and he was the only top 9 forward coming over (with Gaborik going out)--so his point still stands. If anything, factoring in the 2nd Columbus trade makes the point stronger--losing 6 of the top 9, with only 2 top-6 players coming in.

I just don't think there was any reason to dismantle that team, but Sather wanted the big name with the big salary, and guys had to go to make that happen. That bit of pre-lockout style star-swooning set us back a couple of years IMO.

 

[Miller Time NYR]

big loss but a necessary trade/ necessary let go with prust because of the money he wanted imo

glad to see we somehow revived the horse and started beating it again

 

[Hunter Gathers]

The Brassard trade was half a year later, and he was the only top 9 forward coming over (with Gaborik going out)--so his point still stands.

No it doesn't. He said we never replaced them. We pretty clearly did with the Gaborik trade.

 

[Ghost of jas]

No it doesn't. He said we never replaced them. We pretty clearly did with the Gaborik trade.

And, right now, Brassard has one more point than Anisimov, while Kreider, (Dubi's replacement in the lineup) has one more goal than Dubi. And, I'll take Nash over Gaborik and Moore over Erixon.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

And, right now, Brassard has one more point than Anisimov, while Kreider, (Dubi's replacement in the lineup) has one more goal than Dubi. And, I'll take Nash over Gaborik and Moore over Erixon.

Agreed.

Last year, though, if Kreider had shown up like this, I think we would have seen a different ending.

 

[mike14]

Did Brassard die?

I don't think so (unless he's some kind of cool hockey zombie - although there was about a 5 game stretch there were I was wondering...). But as was pointed out he was bought in well into the lockout shortened season when the effect of losing all the players I mentioned had already occurred.

Losing all those guys changed the makeup of the team. If it had of just been Prust and Dubi out the door I don't think it would have mattered as much

 

[eco's bones]

Rangers do need to toughen up. Some of the solution is in house--McIlrath and Miller for instance. If we could land a legit tough guy who can actually play that would be a big help. Watching Dorsett take on Sestito today--Derek's got guts and it's not that Sestito is some world beater of a tough guy but Derek was in way over his head. Derek and Sean Avery about the same size and about the same tough.

 

[PromNite]

Then how come this team lacks heart, consistancy, toughness, and that game to game suffocating defense from 2011 and 2012?

It just is a coincidence that after losing both, they now resemble game to game more the Gomez era?

Please never use the term "Gomez era." There was never an era based around that Devils castaway.

 

[Riverdale]

No.

I wouldn't mind having Prust but I don't like his contract at all.

It changed the team but did not crush them. If losing them crushed the Rangers then they are not a very strong team anyways.

 

[xander]

It's not toughness, it's size The Bruins pushed the Rangers around because they are just flat bigger. Brandon Prust is brave enough to drop the gloves with Milan Lucic, but Lucic is still going to knock him off the puck 7 times out of 10 because he is just a bigger man. The Rangers have a problem playing bigger teams right now (we saw it in the recent LA game as well), but bringing in a guy who will drop the gloves isn't going to change that.

When the Rangers controlled play against the Bruins a few weeks ago, it was because they used their speed advantage to the maximum and forechecked the hell out of them/closed space very rapidly. For whatever reason, the Rangers didn't have that extra gear yesterday, and the second the Rangers lose that final tick of speed, the Bruins can push them around the ice at will.

 

[rkhum]

That team's suffocating defense is completely overblown. When Lundqvist and Biron had an off month and a half 2.7 goals against in that March and April (till the playoffs). Lundqvist is having an off year (even his biggest supporters agree) and the team since their horrible start when the goaltending was bad and the defense was worse but clearly is not representative of the team now has given up 1.85 goals per game. That team's suffocating defense was a myth. More like some of the best goaltending ever.

Back in 2012, the Rangers defense controlled the game.
When you entered the defensive zone, the Rangers may have let you get puck possession but they created a solid defensive shield that was impossible to penetrate-goaltending notwithstanding.

Further in 2011 and 2012 the Rangers got the nickname black and blueshirts because every game they showed up, worked hard, and grinded.

The past two seasons, the defense is not as solid. Used to be the Rangers had a lead, they don't lose it. In 2012 we had like 3 months of not allowing more than 3 goals.

When did we get crushed? Outside of one amazing year in 2011-12, this is the same team we've had every year since the lockout. Where's this big change people are seeing?

2011-12 was the outlier, not this year.

In 2011 and 2012 the Rangers were the hardest working team in the league game in and out.
The past two seasons this has not been the case, they've been very inconsistent.

While I agree 2012 was an outlier, the work ethic of 2011 and 2012 is not explained.

Did losing Dubi and Prust gut the Rangers? No.

Did losing Dubi, AA, Prust, Feds and Prospal while only bringing in Nash as an adequate replacement gut the Rangers? Hell yes

Losing 5 of your top 9 is a sure fire way to lose a team identity.

The question I have is:

1) Was there anyway to do the Nash deal (which they needed, they needed more goal scoring) without Dubi involved?

2) If the Rangers had signed Prust, as insurance in case Dubi left, just how different would we be? Would the identity of 2011 and 2012 remained?

 

[Machinehead]

No .

Well that settles it.

/thread

 

[Hunter Gathers]

Well that settles it.

/thread

Yes.

 

[Kocur Dill]

It's not them specifically as players. It is the constant building, reshuffling and destructing of cultures and philsophies for how to win that losing them represents.

Build a home grown high compete level team. Damn we need skill. Trade for skill. Well now we need depth, crap. Shoot now we don't compete anymore and are getting run out of the building one in three games. Whoops. Gotta add some players that battle. Annnd around and around.

I am struggling with words today but hopefully you get my point.

Exactly.

After getting bounced by the Devils in the ECF, we should have added Semin to that team instead of trading away and letting walk that summer half of the "core" players of that incarnation of the "lunch pail team".

Not bashing Nash. Just in hind site, maybe that was the right move.

 

[Callagraves]

Crush? I wouldn't really say that.

Is there presently a need for both of those players/players in that mold? Very much so. Especially Dubi

 

[RangersHank*]

Come on with this, Dubinsky was good and i dont they replaced his hustle but he wasnt the most consistent player out there

 

[bobbop]

It's not them specifically as players. It is the constant building, reshuffling and destructing of cultures and philsophies for how to win that losing them represents.

Build a home grown high compete level team. Damn we need skill. Trade for skill. Well now we need depth, crap. Shoot now we don't compete anymore and are getting run out of the building one in three games. Whoops. Gotta add some players that battle. Annnd around and around.

I am struggling with words today but hopefully you get my point.

Over the opast 3-4 years, the Rangers have porobably had one of the most consistent (and largest) cores in the NHL. Teams change every year. Last year's team was a different team that didn't get quite the same results as the year before. The jury is still out on this year's team. Check back after the next 11 games.

 

[rkhum]

I don't think now there is any question, and let's not forget AA.
I for underestimated their loss and replaciability, but Sather who was a grinder and in charge should not.

I'd do a refund of Nash for Dubi and AA since we still play boring, can't score, as that crew at least fought and battled every game.

It's back to the Gomez Rangers.

 

[mrhockey193195]

I don't think now there is any question, and let's not forget AA.
I for underestimated their loss and replaciability, but Sather who was a grinder and in charge should not.

I'd do a refund of Nash for Dubi and AA since we still play boring, can't score, as that crew at least fought and battled every game.

It's back to the Gomez Rangers.

That's giving this team too much credit. I'm seeing some dark-ages (98-04) hockey from the Rangers right now. Terrible backchecking, terrible defensive coverage. I thought I was done with this crap when the lockout was over.