Toggle sidebar

Speculation: Free Agent Frenzy Part VI: Someone Get Gorton A Vesey Button.

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
Status
Not open for further replies.
jas said:
This is a very optimistic view IMO. The Rangers currently have a bottom five roster. And teams that are potentially in their range - the Isles, Wings and Canucks - all made moves to move towards mediocrity. If Trotz does nothing else, he will tighten up the defense. Both the Wings and Canucks have been criticized for making moves that won't allow them to bottom out. The only team that I can confidently say is guaranteed to be worse than the Rangers is the tirefire known as Ottawa.
Click to expand...

Except with Mark Stone and Karlsson looking like he will be back, I'm not even sure we are better than Ottawa...
 
jas said:
This is a very optimistic view IMO. The Rangers currently have a bottom five roster. And teams that are potentially in their range - the Isles, Wings and Canucks - all made moves to move towards mediocrity. If Trotz does nothing else, he will tighten up the defense. Both the Wings and Canucks have been criticized for making moves that won't allow them to bottom out. The only team that I can confidently say is guaranteed to be worse than the Rangers is the tirefire known as Ottawa.
Click to expand...

Buffalo. They'll be bad too.
 
I don't know how anyone can say Team X will be better than Team Y or whatever. Every year there are a couple teams that randomly end up a lot better than they should, and a few that end up being incredibly disappointing. We can talk about who should finish where on paper, but it's only on paper, and we know the games aren't played there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chytil, Trxjw, HatTrick Swayze and 4 others
nyr2k2 said:
I don't know how anyone can say Team X will be better than Team Y or whatever. Every year there are a couple teams that randomly end up a lot better than they should, and a few that end up being incredibly disappointing. We can talk about who should finish where on paper, but it's only on paper, and we know the games aren't played there.
Click to expand...

The NHL is also one of the least predictable leagues. You'll do a lot better as a fan in preseason bracketing the NFL, NBA, and to some extent, baseball, then you will the NHL.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nyr2k2
Chris Drurys Weekend said:
The NHL is also one of the least predictable leagues. You'll do a lot better as a fan in preseason bracketing the NFL, NBA, and to some extent, baseball, then you will the NHL.
Click to expand...

Not so sure about that. I'd argue that MLB is the least predictable.
 
jas said:
This is a very optimistic view IMO. The Rangers currently have a bottom five roster. And teams that are potentially in their range - the Isles, Wings and Canucks - all made moves to move towards mediocrity. If Trotz does nothing else, he will tighten up the defense. Both the Wings and Canucks have been criticized for making moves that won't allow them to bottom out. The only team that I can confidently say is guaranteed to be worse than the Rangers is the tirefire known as Ottawa.
Click to expand...

Is it? I think there are a bunch of teams in the worse than or in a comparable state as we are. The likely rosters for the Islanders, Ottawa, Detroit, Arizona, Vancouver, Montreal don't look any better than ours. Carolina has some great players but their goaltending is still really questionable. If Crawford is out for a couple months to begin this year Chicago's going to have a problem and they're going to have a problem with their depth and that mostly overpaid and aging core of players they most depend on. I expect Edmonton to be better but I wouldn't guarantee it. I also don't think the Devils or the Flyers are that great--either of them could not make the playoffs. It wouldn't be a surprise to me anyway. Anaheim is another team that might be on the verge of taking a plunge. Calgary????--what to make of them? Pittsburgh should make the playoffs but IMO they are fast running out of window and selling off depth and prospects the last couple--three years. They'll eventually pay for that.

The Rangers currently have a good veteran group still--led by Henrik. Is it enough for this year's playoffs? I don't think so--but that veteran group will be helpful to the new guys breaking in like Chytil, Andersson, Hajek etc. some of whom will be playing a lot with our team next year. I wouldn't use the word optimistic for where I am---I would put it as hopeful and though probably not playoffs in 18-19--we should be in better position and have a better chance by 19-20.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rangers_23
With Skjei signed, the next relevant arbitration date is August 2nd for Hayes.

Spooner on the last day (August 4th)
 
nyr2k2 said:
I don't know how anyone can say Team X will be better than Team Y or whatever. Every year there are a couple teams that randomly end up a lot better than they should, and a few that end up being incredibly disappointing. We can talk about who should finish where on paper, but it's only on paper, and we know the games aren't played there.
Click to expand...

I’m really not clear on why the qualification that this is on paper needs to be stated.
 
nyr2k2 said:
I don't know how anyone can say Team X will be better than Team Y or whatever. Every year there are a couple teams that randomly end up a lot better than they should, and a few that end up being incredibly disappointing. We can talk about who should finish where on paper, but it's only on paper, and we know the games aren't played there.
Click to expand...

This is true to an extent but more often than not, the teams we expect to be good are good and the teams we expect to be bad are bad.

I think when you talk about a team and it's followed by more than a half dozen "ifs" then you're likely not going to be very good. Yes games aren't played on paper, but the ink is usually right.
 
Go Away Staal said:
This is true to an extent but more often than not, the teams we expect to be good are good and the teams we expect to be bad are bad.

I think when you talk about a team and it's followed by more than a half dozen "ifs" then you're likely not going to be very good. Yes games aren't played on paper, but the ink is usually right.
Click to expand...
Yes--teams predicted to be good are usually good and teams predicted to be bad are usually bad.

I'm talking more about, "Well we're going to be a bottom five team, because there aren't more than three teams that are worse than us right now." That's just, I don't know...I don't see the point. I can see pretty much any "bad team" finishing between 21-31. Same for good teams. So much happens during the year. Injuries, general luck, guys emerging out of nowhere, guys having terrible years, etc. It's why I haven't touched won't touch a discussion of "how bad we are" or whatever. Too many variables.
 
Yeah, I don't care if Spooner gets one or even two years. Anything more, and I guess management views him as a longer term player.
 
Skjei contract good value for both sides, but I’m always a little leery of giving a 24 year old 31 million dollars for six future years of work. Hopefully his ethic and responsibility will persist. And then there’s the 29 year old Smith...
 
Last edited:
Irishguy42 said:
Yeah, I don't care if Spooner gets one or even two years. Anything more, and I guess management views him as a longer term player.
Click to expand...
As long as the trade protections are kept to a minimum, mgmt would sign him to any number of years depending on what it does for the AAV. If you have him on a five year contract at 3.25 per, that’s a slam dunk to trade for max return at this season’s TDL. Obv those wont be the numbers, but you get my point.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom