Toggle sidebar

Just How Good Are the 2013-14 Rangers?

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
That could miss the PO's.

I don't think we will, but I think the situation we are in is underestimated. It takes time for a team to adjust after a big move like this. We have what 3 teams behind us, 19 games to go, and basically no pts up on anyone. We need a great record the last 19 games. There is no time what-so-ever for some kind of settling in period where we loose a bit of pts here and there.

Still doesn't look so bleak, right? But, after the move we have made there is a lot of pressure on this team to get in. If we just get involved moving up and down around the PO line, you know that that jittery impact will come.
 
This season? No. But the St.Louis move was mainly a set up for next season.

I think Sather is going "all in" over the summer. The result will either be glorious or a disaster that Gorton/Clarke will have to repair.
 
Blueshirt Believer said:
This season? No. But the St.Louis move was mainly a set up for next season.

I think Sather is going "all in" over the summer. The result will either be glorious or a disaster that Gorton/Clarke will have to repair.
Click to expand...

Sather should have hung it up 10 years ago...never should have let Neil Smith go...
 
Un-physical team. No one sticks up for eachother. They cower and get manhandled by bigger teams. Nash is an out of shape disinterested lump. No real #1 center. No size and grit on the wings, which means not a tough forecheck and weak board play. No real offensive defenseman.

This is not a contender. And we are not in a vacuum. The Bruins, Penguins, Lightning, are much better than we are. Philly is nipping at our heals. So is Columbus, the Devils...

ONE point separates us from golf and playoff hockey. And considering the complete lack of urgency and psssion that is on display from this team...i wouldn't at all be surprised if we miss the playoffs completely.

Hope i'm wrong. Just not wearing the goggles or drinking the coolaid.

Another thing, maybe Henrik should worry less about all his commercials, endorsements, and his Lambo, and focus on winning a championship. Sochi is over.

Alain Vigneault has no passion.

The country club Rangers are back.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thank you for giving me a reason to be excited about heading into work. I get to sit at my desk, drink my morning coffee, and give this fluff a sweet reality check
 
Beacon said:
I wanted to post it when we lost so that nobody thinks I am just overreacting to a good game: we are a legitimate contender.

After a terrible start, we have been one of the better teams in the league. Now we've added a star player who significantly improves our offense.

On paper, at least, this team looks very good.

1. Lundqvist is arguably the best goalie in the NHL. Definitely the most consistent and reliable.

2. The LD is great: McD is one of the top D in the league; Staal is a first pair defenseman who is playing on our second pair; Moore is serviceable on the third pair.

3. The RD is good too: G, Stralman and Klein are all above average for a first, second and third pair.

4. Our centers are extremely deep. While nobody is a star #1, three of them are average to above average second line centers. Moore, Boyle or Miller as a #4C is excellent.

5. Our RWs are just tremendous. MSL, Nash and MZA are all competent first liners, and one will be on the third line. Dorsett is a good 4th liner. Alternatively, Carcillo is useful for the role he plays. Fast can play in the NHL if we need skill over toughness for a given matchup.

6. LWs are potentially a weak spot, but given our strengths in every other position, and that LWs are most teams' weak spots, Kreider, Hagelin and Poulin are not bad.


To look at it another way, we will have Poo-Brass-MZA as our third line. They have been great so far, much better than any third line the Rangers had in my lifetime. Even the line of Tikkanen-MacTavish-Noonan on the 1994 Cup winner was significantly worse.

MSL, Nash, Brad, Step, Hags and Kreider are a terrific top-6, definitely capable of winning the Cup.

We have all the necessary ingredients: goaltending, scoring, depth. We aren't particularly tough, but not weak either.

This is our best team since 1994. We can do it. Maybe what looks good on paper won't work on the ice, but there is no reason not to be hopeful right now. This team has phenomenal potential.
Click to expand...

I'm excited to see what this team can do once Zuccs is back in the line up.

Hags-Beaver-MSL looked real good last night.

Having three lines deep that can generate scoring chances every night will result in more scoring.

My only issue is that I did not like that both Hags and Beaver were forcing pucks to MSL. His benefit to the team will be in the fact that he will get the attention, you have to stop forcing the puck his way and make plays yourself. I think MSL will help Hags understand that.

should be an interesting final 19 games.
 
On paper, we're in the top ten in the NHL, I think without much question. There aren't really any holes in the lineup. We could really use a true number one center, but I wouldn't call our center depth lacking. The defense is great, the goaltending is great, and there's good scoring depth throughout the forward groups (again, on paper).

Still--does top ten make you a legitimate contender? Say we played each series on neutral ice. Of the top teams in the league--teams like Anaheim, St. Louis, Pittsburgh, Chicago--we're still an underdog against any of them. Is it possible that we'd take any of those teams in a seven game series? Sure, it's possible, but I wouldn't say it's likely or even 50/50.

Right now I'd call us a dark horse contender. If everything comes together and the team starts firing on all cylinders, we have a shot. Anything less than that, though, and we're cooked.
 
Short answer, I completely disagree with you. Long answer. We have no centers or left wingers, that is 2/5 of a line that is no good. We have a great goalie who has been average at best this year. This team is going nowhere fast and the future is going to get worse with no prospects and no draft picks. For those of you to young to have watched from 97 to 03. Start preparing yourself as this team will be there again in 3-4 years for a while. Cally might have the right idea going to Buffalo as he will
Be an aging vet when that team starts to get great with all those draft picks piled up.
 
bubba5 said:
Short answer, I completely disagree with you. Long answer. We have no centers or left wingers, that is 2/5 of a line that is no good. We have a great goalie who has been average at best this year. This team is going nowhere fast and the future is going to get worse with no prospects and no draft picks. For those of you to young to have watched from 97 to 03. Start preparing yourself as this team will be there again in 3-4 years for a while. Cally might have the right idea going to Buffalo as he will
Be an aging vet when that team starts to get great with all those draft picks piled up.
Click to expand...

When did we lose all of our prospects and draft picks?

Also, "no centers or left wingers" is absurd hyperbole.
 
nyr2k2 said:
On paper, we're in the top ten in the NHL, I think without much question. There aren't really any holes in the lineup. We could really use a true number one center, but I wouldn't call our center depth lacking. The defense is great, the goaltending is great, and there's good scoring depth throughout the forward groups (again, on paper).

Still--does top ten make you a legitimate contender? Say we played each series on neutral ice. Of the top teams in the league--teams like Anaheim, St. Louis, Pittsburgh, Chicago--we're still an underdog against any of them. Is it possible that we'd take any of those teams in a seven game series? Sure, it's possible, but I wouldn't say it's likely or even 50/50.

Right now I'd call us a dark horse contender. If everything comes together and the team starts firing on all cylinders, we have a shot. Anything less than that, though, and we're cooked.
Click to expand...

There may not be many holes, but the pegs that currently fill those holes definitely need to be upgraded if they want to even begin to pretend they are a "legit contender." They still lack a PMD or really any consistent offensive threat from the blue line. (McDonagh) has added more offense to his game but I would hardly call him a threat.

With the pieces they have (especially in net) they are the cliched, "team you don't want to face" in the playoffs.
 
I don't know with this team. They seem to outplay the other team 9 games out of 10. However, our best players from last year and best player from earlier in the season are playing poorly. Our supposed top line hasn't been good. Seriously, if Kreider, Stepan, and Nash were playing like they played earlier this season and last season respectively this team would be a nightmare. The D is an enigma. Horrible for 10 games, great for 10 games, mediocre for 10, shake for 10, great for 25, shaky for 3. I feel like this team either doesn't have the personnel to play man or are still struggling with the transition. In theory this is one of the deepest teams in the league that has one of top RW depths in the league. I want to see how they are with Zucc and MSL settled before jumping to conclusions though.
 
Calad said:
I'm not sure if I entirely agree, but I will say its the closest we've been to a legitimate contender in quite a while. Of course the 11-12 team was good but they over-performed big time because of Hank being Hank.
Click to expand...

That's what needs to be remembered. Hank had his signature year. They also had a much higher goals per game average than their talent would suggest. That team had NO business being 12th in the league in scoring and IMO this team has no business being 19th in the league in scoring (though the start of the season skewed those stats).
 
Off Sides said:
Anywhere from Tampa to Columbus, but not above Boston and no lower than Detroit.
Click to expand...
At the time that was anywhere from 3rd to 9th in the east.

I may rate them a bit lower at this point, considering how they have played, Nash going back to perimeter, butt first Nash, how teams are beating them. My initial impression of how the coaching played them with MSL. The loss of one of the few players who finished his checks. The reappearance of the inability to score. The lack of push back when things get tougher.

They have two teams, Detroit and Columbus behind them who have games in hand and are only two points back. Then Washington with the same games played and 2 less points. NJ same games played and 3 pts back.
 
SnowblindNYR said:
That's what needs to be remembered. Hank had his signature year. They also had a much higher goals per game average than their talent would suggest. That team had NO business being 12th in the league in scoring and IMO this team has no business being 19th in the league in scoring (though the start of the season skewed those stats).
Click to expand...

This is such an absurd argument to me. Based on what, what looks pretty? Just to start...how many times has this team scored a rebound goal where they had to fight through an opposing player? They score a lot of good looking goals but when the perfect play isn't there on a platter they can really struggle to get things going. And it's only going to get harder in the playoffs.
 
Totally disagree on this team being a contender. I agree with SBOB that we are a pretender not a contender.The only prayer this team has to legitimately compete is for Hank to be the best player on the ice each and every night. This team is not big enough, tough enough or have the depth to beat Boston in a seven game series.Any team with snarl gives the Rangers trouble. I hope I am wrong but truly believe I am right
Sather once again, as he has done over 14 years, is not willing to pay the price and methodically build a championship club. It is difficult watching going for broke with stars past their prime. I guess I did not like yesterday's trade
 
HatTrick Swayze said:
This is such an absurd argument to me. Based on what, what looks pretty? Just to start...how many times has this team scored a rebound goal where they had to fight through an opposing player? They score a lot of good looking goals but when the perfect play isn't there on a platter they can really struggle to get things going. And it's only going to get harder in the playoffs.
Click to expand...

No, based on talent level and the way they carry the play. This team is 3rd in the league in shots and despite what most people want to say they don't only get ****** opportunities. They get a lot of good opportunities. Hopefully MSL helps with the finishing.
 
The team has more than enough players to win the cup so yes they are contenders. Like all contenders they can easily lose in any round of the PO's though b/c hey, ****happens.

Plenty of size and power, plenty of speed, plenty of skill, plenty of D talent, plenty of G talent. No excuses this year if the team loses it's because a combination of individuals failed and not b/c of some inherent disadvantage but simply /c they didn't give their all and assert their will on the other team (looking at Nash especially and to a lesser degree Kreider, Staal, Girardi and McD). Those guys simply have too much size and talent to avoid bullying other teams. They have Klein, Moore, Boyle, Carcillo and DD backing them up too. Hell even J moore and Poo have size. Zuke and Stralman get in guys faces and throw the body. If Kreider and Nash threw half as much as Zuke did they'd be putting guys in the hospital. (Exaggeration for fun but seriously they could hurt guys). And Boyle bullied EK in the Ott series to the point where it noticeably impacted the game. They did the same to Mike Green (But not his holiness Krug). Hags obviously put out Alfie by mistake but these guys have it in them to just hurt people and assert their will WHILE scoring in droves and playing good, responsible D in front of Hank. These guys show up and it's a contending team without a doubt.
 
Last edited:
aufheben said:
Well obviously no team is flawless, but some have more and bigger holes than other. Can MSL cover up ours? We'll see. Having Center be your weakest position is...not good.

Anaheim, San Jose, St. Louis, Boston...what are their weaknesses? I know Chicago needs a #2 , but what was their weakness last season? Not having a #2C is much less of an issue than not having a #1C. We're 2 points ahead of the Devils FFS. Idk...I'd love to be proven wrong. May be somewhat of a copout to say "Every team has flaws".
Click to expand...

Toews, offensively was a complete non-factor in the playoffs last year. For all intents and purposes they lacked a #1 in the playoffs last year.
 
BTW, I find that rebound goals for the most part are becoming almost obsolete. The game has really changed and teams have become almost flawless in clearing the front of the net. As soft as people say our D is, how many rebound goals have we allowed this year?
 
nyr2k2 said:
When did we lose all of our prospects and draft picks?

Also, "no centers or left wingers" is absurd hyperbole.
Click to expand...

We have no prospects in the org. Miller really the only one. I will believe it when is see it when some of the others make the jump but I don't here anyone outside of NYR talk about how we have a boatload of prospects ready for the NHL. As for centers. If you feel an aging Richards , who will be bought out this summer, and Stepan who is a #2 center at best is great, then good luck with that. As for our LW. Haglin is nice. Pouliot is ok but played above himself and has disappeared again and might be gone soon. Good luck with the rest.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom