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.
Team looks like it hasn't found it's pre-olympic break form yet. Lundqvist and McDonagh especially seem off and like they haven't gotten back into the swing of things. Lundqvist wasn't bad last night either I just don't think he's quite playing as good as he was. McDonagh made a lot of uncharacteristic mistakes last night.

Hopefully that gets sorted out and they can sweep this next section of games...burying Carolina and taking points away from Detroit would be big
 
Jersey Girl said:
The period was more about keeping my statement simple, and to the point, ignoring all 'he said this and he said that' stuff from your post, than declaring myself an authority figure of some sort.
Click to expand...

Ok, fair enough, apologies. That said we'd be underdogs, I wouldn't bet for them, but I'm not going to make any strong predictions after making an enormous move yesterday and only seeing one game and without Zucc to boot.
 
legit contenders? yes.

cup favorites? no.

but in the playoffs, its the team that gets hot at the right time that usually ends up winning the whole thing.
 
Riche16 said:
Agreed on Hank although the word "consistent" made me cringe a bit.

The defense is over rated and still prone to brain farts (see the last 3 games)

Our right wings... good but not great. Nash goes into invisible mode too often. The others are talented but small.

Left wing - issues of too young, inexperienced and or inconsistent. No real threats there unless Kreider evolves.

Centers are really questionable IMO.

We can make some noise but it'll take a miracle to go far.

It would really help if the D tightened up because I think this team can score 2 or 3 fairly consistently.
Click to expand...

I'm pissed at Nash this year, but to say that Nash, St. Louis, and Zucc are only good but not great shows me that you have an agenda.
 
Bleed Ranger Blue said:
My wife, who deals with me watching every Ranger game and tries to show interest from time to time, asked me how the Rangers are doing this season.

My answer: "OK some nights, good other nights...far from great"
Click to expand...
This is, IMO, the best and only way to evaluate a hockey team.
 
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...

I made this same comment in the "Sam Rosen was Right" thread. Feels an AWFUL lot like 1997...
 
-31- said:
Yes but unfortunately those two teams each have a 60% chance of winning the East.
Click to expand...

That's mathamatically not possible.

If one team has a 60% chance of winning the east than the most the other team could have is 40%... which means that there is zero chance for any other team. Which is not possible either.
 
Riche16 said:
Depth isn't a ringing endorsement IMO

I would've thought with Nash and MSL we would be dangerous... we'll see. Nash has been largely unimpressive to me in his time here.
Click to expand...

A pro-rated 40 goal season last year and for all the injuries and bs this year, will still finish around 25-30 goals this year.

He hasn't exceeded expectations, but he's been pretty on par with them.
 
To say we have no centers or left wingers is a complete overstatement, just none that are top notch. Especially centers. All 3 are arguably 2nd liners, just because none are great doesn't mean we have none of them. LW is weaker, but also all 3 are decent players, just no studs. This sky is falling is a joke.
 
Nash might be having a bad season this year, but he also missed 18 games due to a concussion and he's playing with a guy who's not ready for the 1st line and an invisble center..
 
Rags225 said:
That's mathamatically not possible.

If one team has a 60% chance of winning the east than the most the other team could have is 40%... which means that there is zero chance for any other team. Which is not possible either.
Click to expand...
Please. Mathematics has nothing to do with hockey.

You're way out to lunch on this one. Have you seen how big the Bruins are? Have you seen the Penguins' centers? I probably undershot it. Closer to 80% each, realistically.
 
BrooklynRangersFan said:
I made this same comment in the "Sam Rosen was Right" thread. Feels an AWFUL lot like 1997...
Click to expand...

Here is this years roster with ages:

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/leagues/seasons/teams/0000482014.html

Here is the 97-98 Roster with Ages:

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/leagues/seasons/teams/0000481998.html

Here is the 2003-2004 Roster with Ages:

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/leagues/seasons/teams/0000482004.html

Here is the 2007-2008 Roster with Ages:

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/leagues/seasons/teams/0000482008.html

We have a long way to go before we are anywhere close to as old as those teams were
 
Rags225 said:
That's mathamatically not possible.

If one team has a 60% chance of winning the east than the most the other team could have is 40%... which means that there is zero chance for any other team. Which is not possible either.
Click to expand...

900x900px-LL-658002b7_joke_over_your_head.jpeg
 
SnowblindNYR said:
To say we have no centers or left wingers is a complete overstatement, just none that are top notch. Especially centers. All 3 are arguably 2nd liners, just because none are great doesn't mean we have none of them. LW is weaker, but also all 3 are decent players, just no studs. This sky is falling is a joke.
Click to expand...

But they are not 1c's nobody ever wins without 2 under 25 1c's, especially if they don't have 6 draft picks in the 1st 3 rounds the next season. Have you ever watched hockey, durrrr. :sarcasm:
 
The Lone Ranger said:
Compared to the '11-12 squad, Klein and Moore are a definite upgrade over MDZ and Stu Bickel. And of course, MSL isn't likely to do a vanishing act in the playoffs a la Gaborik.

No franchise stud at C. Just gotta hope that MSL's presence rekindles the chemistry that made Richards a PPG player once upon a time.
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree less with that. Del Zotto was one of our TOP defense men in 11-12. He had 10g 31a 41pts and was a +20. And it was far and away the best season of his career, both offensively and defensively. Del Zotto was one of our best players that season, and the fans on here really thought he was going to pan out as a top offensive defense man in the NHL from there.

So, how you lump Del Zotto, from 11-12 with Bickell... to me, is just mind boggling.

He was one of our strong points that season, not a draw back.
 
Fataldogg said:
Couldn't agree less with that. Del Zotto was one of our TOP defense men in 11-12. He had 10g 31a 41pts and was a +20. And it was far and away the best season of his career, both offensively and defensively. Del Zotto was one of our best players that season, and the fans on here really thought he was going to pan out as a top offensive defense man in the NHL from there.

So, how you lump Del Zotto, from 11-12 with Bickell... to me, is just mind boggling.

He was one of our strong points that season, not a draw back.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Its a nasty habit around here when evaluating players. MDZ struggled the last 2 seasons, but in '11-12, he was great. FAR better than John Moore.

But MDZ is gone, so its an easy thing to say. When evaluating the current roster, people have an equally poor habit of taking their best seasons and attributing that to be their norm...and thats why we get so many "Well, if ________ wasn't struggling, imagine how good we'd be!"
 
Fataldogg said:
Couldn't agree less with that. Del Zotto was one of our TOP defense men in 11-12. He had 10g 31a 41pts and was a +20. And it was far and away the best season of his career, both offensively and defensively. Del Zotto was one of our best players that season, and the fans on here really thought he was going to pan out as a top offensive defense man in the NHL from there.

So, how you lump Del Zotto, from 11-12 with Bickell... to me, is just mind boggling.

He was one of our strong points that season, not a draw back.
Click to expand...

That season.

Del Zotto was close to abysmal for pretty much every other stretch outside of '11-'12 and the first two months of his rookie year.
 
As I go through this thread, I cant help but think that this is a vision of how you want the Rangers to be, and not what they actually are.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom