Toggle sidebar

How bad would you kill for our old team?

I view that season as a lot of fun for us, and a great learning experience for the kids on the team. There's a lot of good things about this group moving forward.

But I still think it was stupid to essentially blow that team up.
 
Our shortcomings this season had little to do with the Nash trade. I'd do that trade over 100 more times. If anything, the lack of depth that lead to the Brassard/Moore trade made the team even better. Nash and brass are beasts here and I am not worried about this team moving forward.
 
3rdlineglory said:
Callahan and Dubinsky are comparable, but one regressed after their raise. The other's production roughly remained the same. Depth is nice, but you need high end talent too. Also, at least one of Dubinsky or Anisimov would have ended up getting third line minutes. That's a lot for a guy that far down the depth chart.
Click to expand...

Dubinsky had one rough season, but actually outproduced Callahan PPG wise this shortened season.

I don't see how Anisimov or Dubinsky would be on the 3rd line on this current roster. I think it'd be pretty clear that they'd form a good 2nd line.
 
I wouldn't kill for our old team at all. I'm 100% confident in saying this team is better. Just like last year, they both didn't get as far as they hoped.
 
Losing Anisimov and Dubi was a fatal blow. LOL.

ZOMG, what we could've done with their production!

Get over last year. The team, some how became a 1st seed, and struggled like a bunch of losers in every round. Including being embarrassed by the Devils.

Sad state of affairs that that team is looked up to. :puke
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That team last year hit the trifecta. Ottawa...Wash...NJ...

That's as easy as it gets in the EC and they still couldn't do it. And when they did do it (get ahead), it was 7 games.

You think this franchise will be able to dodge, Bos, Pitt, Philly like they did last year? We saw what a Torts team did vs. a real team and it blew.
 
Kershaw said:
Dubinsky had one rough season, but actually outproduced Callahan PPG wise this shortened season.

I don't see how Anisimov or Dubinsky would be on the 3rd line on this current roster. I think it'd be pretty clear that they'd form a good 2nd line.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't play Anisimov over Brassard, but he'd be perfect on a defensive 3rd line with Callahan.

Dubi would be perfect at 2nd line LW.

But Nash was fantastic in the reg. season and I would still make that trade no question. I'm not putting weight to not scoring under Torts' terrified playoff system.
 
Wasn't that team coached by Torts? You know, the idiot who cost us a Cup quite recently.
 
Jagr6810 said:
i was just thinking today our team in 2011-2012 was amazing , i wish i could turn back time and call up sather just before he pulled the trigger on nash :(

watch this video brings back awesome memories
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOg8ThHJwDQ
Click to expand...

2012 team caught lighting in a bottle. Lots of OT wins, etc. They rarely, if ever, dominated games from wire to wire.

Dubinsky was horrible in 2012. Anisimov vanished for a long period. Boyle stunk 75 pct of the season. Prust had his worst season as a pro. Richards stunk for 50 pct of the season. Sauer's career ended. Staal missed half the season.

The 2012 were far from "amazing". The 1971-73, 1991, 1994 team were most certainly amazing. The only thing amazing about the 2012 team was that they somehow won 51 games with half a productive roster.

To me the 2012 team was more like the 1986 team. Lots of young guys, a Vezina goalie but had trouble controlling games.
 
3rdlineglory said:
Callahan and Dubinsky are comparable, but one regressed after their raise. The other's production roughly remained the same. Depth is nice, but you need high end talent too. Also, at least one of Dubinsky or Anisimov would have ended up getting third line minutes. That's a lot for a guy that far down the depth chart.
Click to expand...

I always felt that Anisimov was the guy we would miss the most. He was penciled in to that 3rd line slot. By tradeing him it forced Boyle up to the 3rd line which he isn't suited for.
 
The 2011-12 squad really came together as team, and I didn't feel the same way about this year's team. There were plenty of games when I felt like there was a bunch of individuals skating out there and not one unit.

But that's what happens when there is roster turnover, especially when homegrown and "glue" guys are lost. And it's not the first time this has happened - in 2008-09 and 2009-10, the team lost some key players and the roster was restructured. There were plenty of games in those seasons where it looked like a bunch of individuals rather than a team.

The 2011-12 team overachieved, and who knows if that success would have been replicated. But at least they established some sort of identity, a "Bruins-lite" type of team that worked hard and played tough. I'm not sure what the identity of the current squad is.
 
GWOW said:
2012 team caught lighting in a bottle. Lots of OT wins, etc. They rarely, if ever, dominated games from wire to wire.
Click to expand...

No team does that on anything near a consistent basis. This is just another example of out of whack demands from the fanbase.
 
The 1972 Rangers were +125 in goals, lost only 17 games, and had unbeaten streaks of 14 and 16 games in that very season.

The 1994 team went 55-20 until losing their first playoff game to the Caps. What inconsistent knuckleheads.

The 1971 team had a streak where they lost three times in 28 games.

But no. The really smart guys on here say it cant be done consistently.
 
Anybody who watched the 1992 or 1994 teams in detail (and actually understand the sport) cannot deny that the Rangers controlled almost all of those games. When they lost or were outplayed was more of a news story than the game itself.

The 2012 team never did that. They didnt resemble the 1985 Oilers or the 1993 Penguins or the 1996 Avalanche or the 1976 Canadiens or the 2002 Red Wings. They were essentially a fluke and the seasons bookending 2012 reinforces that.

The 1992 Rangers team wasnt a fluke. The 1971-73 Rangers werent a fluke.

1986 and 2012 -- flukes.
 
GWOW said:
This is just plain dumb, and you're showing your lack of knowledge of the sport.
Click to expand...

The sport is about momentum swings, and its about having better players to create more of them. The notion of a "dominant, wire to wire" win at the NHL level is rare.

Ive come to grips that, for some fans, this will always be the expectation, and they will always be disappointed - and, as per custom, they will then look for scapegoats as to why it didnt happen.

You trashing last year's teams accomplishments seems to be a new low.
 
That team was good under Torts. They blew it up and added too much skill for Tortorella. Under a new coach, the system will open up, and we should be in for some good and entertaining hockey.

Butterfly effect/captain hindsight/etc... etc...

EDIT - Sorry, adding more.

Now imagine starting at the beginning of the season last year, we had a coach who kept Gaborik at RW, and didn't try to turn him into a shot-blocking, grinding machine? Weird. On paper, what we opened up with last season was the best team we've seen the Rangers ice since the 06-07 season (which I think was the Rangers best team post-lockout). On paper though.
 
Last edited:
Blue Blooded said:
I wouldn't play Anisimov over Brassard, but he'd be perfect on a defensive 3rd line with Callahan.
Click to expand...

That's fair. But I think a Anisimov-Callahan duo won't be a 3rd line on this roster. They're top 5 forwards on this roster.

Dubi would be perfect at 2nd line LW.

But Nash was fantastic in the reg. season and I would still make that trade no question. I'm not putting weight to not scoring under Torts' terrified playoff system.
Click to expand...

Under a terrible Tortorella playoff system, even Mats Zuccarello managed to outproduce Nash with a fraction of the ice time. I would like to give him the benefit of the doubt, but he was completely neutralized in his other playoff season with CBJ.
 
1. I would not "kill" for that team. Not original but true: murder is contrary to the laws of God and man..

2. We should have made different trades to same or better end.
For example, we could have made a smarter deal for Nash, who (or alternate for) we need.
Could have said, we are eating upwards of 80 mil salary back, you take Redden as part of deal, which would = more flexibility now. And deal could have been basically MDZ + Dubinsky + Boyle + Erixon for Nash + Brassard or Moore. We keep Anisimov, we keep our 1st.


3. But ultimately Torts getting that team into playoffs not good enough, since they were unable to finish early, and then, despite being thoroughly conditioned, wound up too exhausted to advance. Sickening how it ended vs. Devs and that is chiefly on Torts.
 
Bleed Ranger Blue said:
The sport is about momentum swings, and its about having better players to create more of them. The notion of a "dominant, wire to wire" win at the NHL level is rare.

Ive come to grips that, for some fans, this will always be the expectation, and they will always be disappointed - and, as per custom, they will then look for scapegoats as to why it didnt happen.

You trashing last year's teams accomplishments seems to be a new low.
Click to expand...

The insinuation you make is that since teams do not dominate other teams with any sort of regularity each game is a toss up. The parity in this league is def nowhere near that close. Without being as rude as the other guy I definitely disagree with your assertion that teams are not dominant on a regular game-game basis. All 82? of course not. But you can't tell me that comparing Bos in these PO's to last years NYR is apples to apples. Bos IS a great team in these PO's whereas the 2012 NYR barely squeezed by. The best teams in the league DEFINTIELY dominate other teams regularly and that does not mean winning 7-1.
 
Bleed Ranger Blue said:
The sport is about momentum swings, and its about having better players to create more of them. The notion of a "dominant, wire to wire" win at the NHL level is rare.

Ive come to grips that, for some fans, this will always be the expectation, and they will always be disappointed - and, as per custom, they will then look for scapegoats as to why it didnt happen.

You trashing last year's teams accomplishments seems to be a new low.
Click to expand...

Thanks for admitting your contradiction. First you said "No team does that on anything near a consistent basis", and now your saying it's "rare"

Rare as in 1971, 1972, 1973, 1992 and 1994?

Funny because those were the years I was referencing, and contrary to popular HF belief, Rangers history didnt start in 1998 or 2006 or 2012.

There is a small group of us here who HAVE seen NHL teams dominate wire to wire, dictate play, and set the standard for what fan bases should want and yes, even expect.

The 2012 team, while exciting and refreshing, was nowhere near as dominant as the aforementioned teams.

You know, the teams some of us gladly paid money to watch 41 times a night at MSG.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom