Player Discussion Jeff Gorton

[Levitate]

Talking about "quick rebuilds" I'd look at something like Boston. They won a cup, were quite competitive for years, then started slipping and made a few moves that had everyone shaking their heads (trading Hamilton, Seguin probably fits in there too) and with aging guys like Krecji and even Bergeron, Chara getting grey on the blueline, everyone was wondering if Boston was going anywhere but down.

But some great drafting, some guys stepping up (Marchand in particular), and suddenly they're a contender again and could be for a long time. You have Pastrnak developing into a super star, Marchand taking the next step, and a coach doing a good job getting the most out of his vets, along with some great drafting for a guy like McAvoy, plenty of young depth guys who can contribute, and a solid goalie, and bam they're back in it. They didn't have to sell off their entire roster and suck for years to do that. They just drafted well and got a coach who could put his players in a position to succeed.

Can the Rangers do that? If they hit on Andersson and Chytil (especially if one of them turns into a star) and hit it big with their draft picks this year, then yeah, I think they can get back real quick. Maybe Zibanejad is that guy who takes the next big step and becomes that 70 point center, maybe Chytil becomes that star player ala Pastrnak, maybe Andersson becomes their go to in every situation guy and team leader like Bergeron (though I'm not banking on him being as good as Bergeron!), maybe some of their other players end up being that young star on defense they need. There's a whole lot of maybe's, to be sure, but with good drafting it's possible.

Also, I'd mention that Gorton said they want a coach that can grow and develop with the team. To me that means they're looking for a guy who can come in and guide the young players (the developmental part) but also be a smart enough guy that he too can grow into that coach you need to help take your team forward. I doubt they really want to go through "ok hire this coach for this reason, then fire him to hire this coach for that reason". There's no reason a coach couldn't also get better and be the kind of guy who takes your team forward. Just because we saw years of AV not changing doesn't mean other coaches can't

 

[NYR]

I disagree with that post in its entirety. We can play the "what if" game all we want, but it's all purely opinionated at this point. Who knows where we'd be if AV was fired then...maybe we beat Ottawa the next year and go to the ECF...maybe we don't. If you're suggesting that we would have won the Cup after (possibly) defeating Ottawa, then I'll just agree to disagree on that.

But the fact of the matter is this team was only getting older and tired at that point. Girardi was absolutely atrocious in his last year (and I love G) and he was never going to be worth a fraction of what we were paying him. Stepan's contract was going to be an albatross for a team that desperately needed cap space and an injection of youth, and his NTC was about to kick in. McDonagh was 1 year away from UFA and it was either trade him or pay him... at 30 years old, which would you rather? The Nash point is ridiculous...I don't think it's even worth continuing to justify my difference of opinion. But I find myself having a difficult time disagreeing with any and all moves Gorton has made recently.

Some good points but how do you explain the fact that fact Mac, G and Miller all have a more than excellent chance of winning a cup this year?
I'll agree to disagree on Dsteps contract being an albatross after scoring 56 points on the worst team in the league all while playing a complete 82 game schedule.

 

[ReggieDunlop68]

Wait, so how do you actually want to do this rebuild? What would be your plan of action?

It’s a genuine question, not trying to be sarcastic. Same thing I’ve been trying to do when I ask who you want to be the next coach.

Low n' slow.

Have I not been indicating this?

 

[Mac n Gs]

Low n' slow.

Have I not been indicating this?

Well, how low n how slow? Strip it down to the studs and go for first overall slow? Or do what I mentioned earlier in the thread and add youth, and aim to have an Arizona-esque trajectory this season where we're still bad, but build as a team over time and end the season on a high note?

 

[ReggieDunlop68]

Well, how low n how slow? Strip it down to the studs and go for first overall slow? Or do what I mentioned earlier in the thread and add youth, and aim to have an Arizona-esque trajectory this season where we're still bad, but build as a team over time and end the season on a high note?

Raise the heat a tad each season. Not this one pls.

 

[MarkMessyay11]

Some good points but how do you explain the fact that fact Mac, G and Miller all have a more than excellent chance of winning a cup this year?
I'll agree to disagree on Dsteps contract being an albatross after scoring 56 points on the worst team in the league all while playing a complete 82 game schedule.

Not sure how that's applicable to this debate, but Mac, G, and Miller all find themselves on a team that's currently much better constructed and in the peak of their contention window...they played similar roles, if not more important roles, on our teams that had great chances to win it all as well. And they're all benefiting from less pressure to perform (as top options or under heavy scrutiny) and/or better situations - Miller never had line mates like Stamkos and Kucherov.

Stepan I understand. Maybe my comment wasn't fair about him...he's the epitome of consistency and professionalism. I loved him and thought he was always extremely underrated as a top center...and I think we're easily a better team with him this past season. Probably make the playoffs again. But I don't think him being traded was a reflection of his own performance, as much as it was out of necessity and circumstance. He had a NTC kicking in and was under contract at $6.5 mil until 31 years old, and we had no blue chip prospects in our system. It was a perfect combination of shedding a big contract and moving the team in the direction of this rebuild. Keeping him would have only prolonged the cycle of mediocrity this team was/is in.

 

[NYR]

Not sure how that's applicable to this debate, but Mac, G, and Miller all find themselves on a team that's currently much better constructed and in the peak of their contention window...they played similar roles, if not more important roles, on our teams that had great chances to win it all as well. And they're all benefiting from less pressure to perform (as top options or under heavy scrutiny) and/or better situations - Miller never had line mates like Stamkos and Kucherov.

Stepan I understand. Maybe my comment wasn't fair about him...he's the epitome of consistency and professionalism. I loved him and thought he was always extremely underrated as a top center...and I think we're easily a better team with him this past season. Probably make the playoffs again. But I don't think him being traded was a reflection of his own performance, as much as it was out of necessity and circumstance. He had a NTC kicking in and was under contract at $6.5 mil until 31 years old, and we had no blue chip prospects in our system. It was a perfect combination of shedding a big contract and moving the team in the direction of this rebuild. Keeping him would have only prolonged the cycle of mediocrity this team was/is in.

We are in the JG Thread and he had those players at his disposal.

Instead of supplementing those players and bringing in the right support to compliment them, he blew it up instead.

I have a problem with that.

If the next "Core" doesn't work out, what is he going to do?

Blow it up again?

 

[Levitate]

We are in the JG Thread and he had those players at his disposal.

Instead of supplementing those players and bringing in the right support to compliment them, he blew it up instead.

I have a problem with that.

If the next "Core" doesn't work out, what is he going to do?

Blow it up again?

eh that's a weird way to look at it

Those guys are support guys on Tampa, that's the difference. They were go to guys on the Rangers and on Tampa they are the supplemental guys.

The perpetual problem for the Rangers is that they don't have the top end talent that other teams have, other than Lundqvist (who is now in the twilight of his career). If they had the talent to make Miller, Girardi, and even McDonagh more complementary players, then they probably have a much better chance at winning the cup in the past few years and going forward. Since they don't...well, do you fish or cut bait?

 

[LORDE]

Some good points but how do you explain the fact that fact Mac, G and Miller all have a more than excellent chance of winning a cup this year?
I'll agree to disagree on Dsteps contract being an albatross after scoring 56 points on the worst team in the league all while playing a complete 82 game schedule.

They’re on a way more complete team with a better coach and MUCH better GM.

They’ve been brought in as complimentary players to help advance the cause... they’re not the horses pulling the carriage.

How’s that?

 

[Edge]

Talking about "quick rebuilds" I'd look at something like Boston. They won a cup, were quite competitive for years, then started slipping and made a few moves that had everyone shaking their heads (trading Hamilton, Seguin probably fits in there too) and with aging guys like Krecji and even Bergeron, Chara getting grey on the blueline, everyone was wondering if Boston was going anywhere but down.

But some great drafting, some guys stepping up (Marchand in particular), and suddenly they're a contender again and could be for a long time. You have Pastrnak developing into a super star, Marchand taking the next step, and a coach doing a good job getting the most out of his vets, along with some great drafting for a guy like McAvoy, plenty of young depth guys who can contribute, and a solid goalie, and bam they're back in it. They didn't have to sell off their entire roster and suck for years to do that. They just drafted well and got a coach who could put his players in a position to succeed.

Can the Rangers do that? If they hit on Andersson and Chytil (especially if one of them turns into a star) and hit it big with their draft picks this year, then yeah, I think they can get back real quick. Maybe Zibanejad is that guy who takes the next big step and becomes that 70 point center, maybe Chytil becomes that star player ala Pastrnak, maybe Andersson becomes their go to in every situation guy and team leader like Bergeron (though I'm not banking on him being as good as Bergeron!), maybe some of their other players end up being that young star on defense they need. There's a whole lot of maybe's, to be sure, but with good drafting it's possible.

Also, I'd mention that Gorton said they want a coach that can grow and develop with the team. To me that means they're looking for a guy who can come in and guide the young players (the developmental part) but also be a smart enough guy that he too can grow into that coach you need to help take your team forward. I doubt they really want to go through "ok hire this coach for this reason, then fire him to hire this coach for that reason". There's no reason a coach couldn't also get better and be the kind of guy who takes your team forward. Just because we saw years of AV not changing doesn't mean other coaches can't

I don’t think it’s as far off of a concept as some realize. Of course, there are still a number of things that have to fall into place first.

But, at the very least, I feel comfortable saying several potential ingredients are on the table. Now we have to add to those ingredients and turn them into a meal.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

We are in the JG Thread and he had those players at his disposal.

Instead of supplementing those players and bringing in the right support to compliment them, he blew it up instead.

I have a problem with that.

If the next "Core" doesn't work out, what is he going to do?

Blow it up again?

Those players (McDonagh, Miller etc) are complimentary players at best. They are not the players who carry a team. They are succeeding in Tampa because they are good enough for the role they are in.

McDonagh as a 2nd pair D-man, Miller as a complimentary player on the Stamkos-line. Bring in the right support to compliment them? That's the wrong approach. We were not lacking complimentary players. We had an abundance of them. What we lacked for years is star players. Players who carry their line. Players who make others around them better. Stamkos, Crosby, Malkin, Kane, Bergeron... Those type of players.

 

[Phoicon]

Those players (McDonagh, Miller etc) are complimentary players at best. They are not the players who carry a team. They are succeeding in Tampa because they are good enough for the role they are in.

McDonagh as a 2nd pair D-man, Miller as a complimentary player on the Stamkos-line. Bring in the right support to compliment them? That's the wrong approach. We were not lacking complimentary players. We had an abundance of them. What we lacked for years is star players. Players who carry their line. Players who make others around them better. Stamkos, Crosby, Malkin, Kane, Bergeron... Those type of players.

Agreed. We also lacked players like Andersson - players with the desire to win just radiating from their play & attitude. Chytil and Howden have got that as well.

Can you remember how we sort of just faded away against the Kings in the finals? We started many games well and in the end Brian Boyle was our best skater.

 

[haohmaru]

Those players (McDonagh, Miller etc) are complimentary players at best. They are not the players who carry a team. They are succeeding in Tampa because they are good enough for the role they are in.

McDonagh as a 2nd pair D-man, Miller as a complimentary player on the Stamkos-line. Bring in the right support to compliment them? That's the wrong approach. We were not lacking complimentary players. We had an abundance of them. What we lacked for years is star players. Players who carry their line. Players who make others around them better. Stamkos, Crosby, Malkin, Kane, Bergeron... Those type of players.

Vegas is giving the finger to the "star players" argument lol.

 

[hi]

Vegas is giving the finger to the "star players" argument lol.

They are being carried by a star player selected first overall in the draft

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Vegas is giving the finger to the "star players" argument lol.

They are the exception. And they haven't won anything yet. So far, they are as successful as the 2011-12 Rangers.

 

[Off Sides]

My issue comparing the Boston model to the other Cups teams,

Boston drafted both Bergeron and Krejci with picks 45 and 63 and Lucic at 50. Marchand at 71 While that shows it's certainly possible to get players of that magnitude without early picks, I'm not so sure that is a strategy that is very repeatable. They also signed Chara who was one of the very few long term expensive UFAs to actually works out towards being a big part of Cup winning team. (one that beat an AV coached team in the finals)

My other issue would be that is one team out of all of the ones who have won the Cup since the salary cap that was able to pull it off using those methods. Some would call that more of an outlier than the general way it works.

Boston still had those players this past run, and some others they drafted who turned out better than their draft status, Pasternak, yet were eliminated by a team, who while it took a while, did draft #1, #2, #6 in consecutive years.

So I believe even if they are trying to sort of replicate the Boston model, first off they are going to have to get pretty lucky in the draft to get players who should have been taken much earlier, they would also have to sign the right UFA(s), make the right trades and they are going to have to beat teams who drafted very early for several years to possible win a Cup.

Given the UFAs they signed when it's assumed Gorton was in control, Shattenkirk, Smith, given some of the trade returns, mostly ADA, (as I am being honest I don't know enough about the other prospects they acquired more recently to have any sort of good read on them) yet to me it is not indicating their player evaluation has been correct enough to follow the Boston model.

Yes that may be unfair as it's still early to try to judge those moves, but that is my opinion of them at this current juncture, that those returns could turn out to be secondary players but to me they will have to become much more than that to follow what Boston did, once.

Much of that leads to my angst that they are just building a team similar to there several last variations, a team that eventually in the playoffs will run into a team that picked early several times, received some players who when healthy rank among the top producers in the league, who can go near to or above a point per game in the playoffs, and the Rangers team that did not will be eliminated by them.

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

My issue comparing the Boston model to the other Cups teams,

Boston drafted both Bergeron and Krejci with picks 45 and 63 and Lucic at 50. Marchand at 71 While that shows it's certainly possible to get players of that magnitude without early picks, I'm not so sure that is a strategy that is very repeatable. They also signed Chara who was one of the very few long term expensive UFAs to actually works out towards being a big part of Cup winning team. (one that beat an AV coached team in the finals)

My other issue would be that is one team out of all of the ones who have won the Cup since the salary cap that was able to pull it off using those methods. Some would call that more of an outlier than the general way it works.

Boston still had those players this past run, and some others they drafted who turned out better than their draft status, Pasternak, yet were eliminated by a team, who while it took a while, did draft #1, #2, #6 in consecutive years.

So I believe even if they are trying to sort of replicate the Boston model, first off they are going to have to get pretty lucky in the draft to get players who should have been taken much earlier, they would also have to sign the right UFA(s), make the right trades and they are going to have to beat teams who drafted very early for several years to possible win a Cup.

Given the UFAs they signed when it's assumed Gorton was in control, Shattenkirk, Smith, given some of the trade returns, mostly ADA, (as I am being honest I don't know enough about the other prospects they acquired more recently to have any sort of good read on them) yet to me it is not indicating their player evaluation has been correct enough to follow the Boston model.

Yes that may be unfair as it's still early to try to judge those moves, but that is my opinion of them at this current juncture, that those returns could turn out to be secondary players but to me they will have to become much more than that to follow what Boston did, once.

Much of that leads to my angst that they are just building a team similar to there several last variations, a team that eventually in the playoffs will run into a team that picked early several times, received some players who when healthy rank among the top producers in the league, who can go near to or above a point per game in the playoffs, and the Rangers team that did not will be eliminated by them.

I get the fear, but last season was very encouraging and an excellent start. So, the proof now is in how they behave over the next season-plus. I expect them to be phasing in lots of youth, but if they get the right coach, to be good enough to hover at or near the PO cut-off in 2018-2019. Do they then succumb to temptation and buy at the 2019 TDL? Or do they hold fast, and commit to the current path? That'll tell the tale.

 

[haveandare]

They are the exception. And they haven't won anything yet. So far, they are as successful as the 2011-12 Rangers.

And a lot more successful than many teams with obvious star players who have been golfing for weeks, including two they eliminated themselves fairly easily.

 

[Off Sides]

I get the fear, but last season was very encouraging and an excellent start. So, the proof now is in how they behave over the next season-plus. I expect them to be phasing in lots of youth, but if they get the right coach, to be good enough to hover at or near the PO cut-off in 2018-2019. Do they then succumb to temptation and buy at the 2019 TDL? Or do they hold fast, and commit to the current path? That'll tell the tale.

I agree, we'll see what they do but they have some doubters, Brooks being perhaps the most connected is either just using his opinion on the short cut, will not take forever thing, or he is relaying some information that he has gleaned from within the organization.

All the same I am not trying to say they will fail, they did mostly the stuff I would have also done this past deadline, but I'd be staying on that path rather than trying to deviate so early in the process.

I agree they will need some vets, some cushion, build a competitive atmosphere, all that is reasonable to me within a rebuild, yet I think that can often lead to them becoming very quickly overconfident in the state of the rebuild, and I'm just not sure they can resist temptation.

Much of that comes from my read on what I think Sather would have done, but after reading what Dolan also said, I'm not to sure what the actual mandates were under Sather or what they are now. (again taking those quotes at face value along with Brooks speculation or otherwise) I just don't like the the general sense I am getting from those wishy washy somewhat contradictory terms they are using.

 

[NYR]

eh that's a weird way to look at it

Those guys are support guys on Tampa, that's the difference. They were go to guys on the Rangers and on Tampa they are the supplemental guys.

The perpetual problem for the Rangers is that they don't have the top end talent that other teams have, other than Lundqvist (who is now in the twilight of his career). If they had the talent to make Miller, Girardi, and even McDonagh more complementary players, then they probably have a much better chance at winning the cup in the past few years and going forward. Since they don't...well, do you fish or cut bait?

They’re on a way more complete team with a better coach and MUCH better GM.

They’ve been brought in as complimentary players to help advance the cause... they’re not the horses pulling the carriage.

How’s that?

Those players (McDonagh, Miller etc) are complimentary players at best. They are not the players who carry a team. They are succeeding in Tampa because they are good enough for the role they are in.

McDonagh as a 2nd pair D-man, Miller as a complimentary player on the Stamkos-line. Bring in the right support to compliment them? That's the wrong approach. We were not lacking complimentary players. We had an abundance of them. What we lacked for years is star players. Players who carry their line. Players who make others around them better. Stamkos, Crosby, Malkin, Kane, Bergeron... Those type of players.

I get what you guys are saying and I do agree for the most part but..

Our new supporting players are considerably worse then what we had before and we still don't have that high end talent so other than getting younger,
what exactly has changed?

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

I get what you guys are saying and I do agree for the most part but..

Our new supporting players are considerably worse then what we had before and we still don't have that high end talent so other than getting younger,
what exactly has changed?

It's called a rebuild

 

[NYR]

It's called a rebuild

Obviously but if JG couldn't add "Elite" talent to the team he already had, what makes you think he can now?
He's already traded away the more high valued players and you aren't getting that type of player with any of the current players so
what has changed in that regard?

 

[True Blue]

Instead of supplementing those players and bringing in the right support to compliment them, he blew it up instead.

I have a problem with that.

If the next "Core" doesn't work out, what is he going to do?

This core did not win anything and were not winning anything. And got drubbed out of the playoffs for several years running. You do not supplement that. You call a spade a spade and move on.

Obviously but if JG couldn't add "Elite" talent to the team he already had, what makes you think he can now?

Let's also remember that he inherited a team with a plundered system and one that was up against the cap. How was "elite" getting on the team?

He's already traded away the more high valued players and you aren't getting that type of player with any of the current players so
what has changed in that regard?

He traded away players to bring back assets and obtain cap relief. We have no idea of what type of players they will become yet.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

Obviously but if JG couldn't add "Elite" talent to the team he already had, what makes you think he can now?
He's already traded away the more high valued players and you aren't getting that type of player with any of the current players so
what has changed in that regard?

To add elite talent to the complementary core, he would’ve had to gut the conplementary core.

What’s changed is the organization now has a decent amount of prospects that can form the next group of really good complementary players, has more swings to try to hit on potentially elite players not taken top 2/3 in the draft, and in doing both of those things has added a lot more currency to make future trades for elite talent if it becomes available

 

[NYR]

This core did not win anything and were not winning anything. And got drubbed out of the playoffs for several years running. You do not supplement that. You call a spade a spade and move on.

Let's also remember that he inherited a team with a plundered system and one that was up against the cap. How was "elite" getting on the team?

He traded away players to bring back assets and obtain cap relief. We have no idea of what type of players they will become yet.

IDK man.
I'm just not a fan of the way things have been handled.
He's been here long enough where he needs to be held accountable for the current state of the team.
AV should've been canned after the first round ouster to the Pens.
He brought in some real crappy players also.

We don't know what the prospects will become but Names, Spooner, Smith, Shattenkirk ADA?
That's a big steaming pile of dogshit to me.

Add to that, the fact that he wants to create a more north/south team which I'm all for but by obtaining the above players, it completely contradicts anything north/south.
This guy is just a dog chasing his tail IMO.
He's throwing out hail mary's but there are no receivers lol