Player Discussion Marc Staal: Part II
- Thread starter Fugazy
- Start date
-
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
Edge
Kris King's Ghost
Tenure and wanting to see how a significantly younger replacement comes along.
Staal is past his expiration date. I don't think anyone really questions that.
Whether a defenseman who is 11 years his junior is ready to step and take extra time, or better served getting more time to cook, is a different question, or has been to this point.
I'll venture that the Rangers would be perfectly content if it's onward and upward for Hajek and Lindgren. Knowing full well that there's going to be some growing pains from a pair of defenseman who are barely old enough to drink and who haven't yet played a combined 25 NHL games.
Longer leash/known quantity/not much choice.
Other than Staal, Quinn had ADA, Shattenkirk, Pionk, Smith, Skjei, Claesson, McQuaid, Hajek, Gilmour and Lindgren as options last year. there's just not much there, especially as most of it was unknowns.
Going into this season was similar, but some of the younger unknowns had 12 more months of NA hockey in them, plus we signed a legit top-pairing d in the off season
- Jul 20, 2005
- 4,925
- 2,332
Mostly the former. Its hard to bench an alternate captain especially when there aren't any obvious and significantly better choices.
But I also think Quinn comes from the same school as seemingly every hockey coach where defensive defensemen (i.e. defesenmen who spent most of their shifts stuck in their own zone) are still viewed as assets.
I believe that it had nothing whatsoever to do with having a longer leash or tenure. And also do think it is pretty (not accusing you specifically of this) to believe that Quinn was the only one involved with this decision. Quinn, Gorton and JD could very easily see the same thing that all of us were seeing. Where, I believe, the organization was asking the question was if not Stall, then who? They were not going out to sign a waiver wire player to spend dollars and put another road block ahead of Lindgren. They were not moving Smith back to full time defense. So that only left Lindgren taking over. Lingdgren was in Hartord and I believe both the coaching staff and management believed that at first he may not have been ready and shortly there after, they wanted him to build his game up a bit before taking on the minutes. Once they felt that he can take the minutes, they made the move.
I do not think that there were any knee jerks involved and that the three of them could not see what everyone else was seeing. I also believe that their game plan is the long view and not game to game as some of the posters on here are. So because they have the long view and see this team for what it is realistically, there was no need for them to make a move until they felt that Lindgren can step in and contribute.
- Jul 20, 2005
- 4,925
- 2,332
Edge
Kris King's Ghost
Eh, there are always outliers. People will always have a soft spot for Staal because of what happened, and I get that.
But at this point, I think most people really do see that the end is near. Having said that, someone goes down or implodes and we're right back at it.
Well we’ll see Staal back pretty soon. Worth noting Lindgren’s a +1 in a 5-2 game.
Irishguy42
Mr. Preachy
Won't be Lindgren coming out, I think. Hajek...probably.
Lindgren is better than Hajek right now, so, it should be Hajek if anyone comes out. (Obviously no one should come out, but we know it's an inevitability after tonight.)
Cmox
Registered User
Sit Brady. Please DQ.
- Jul 6, 2017
- 14,776
- 14,084
If their previous dealings are any indication, we could do a 1 for 1 swap with Laine or Connor.
I would agree with this. I also would not be surprised if there is some sort of rotation on LD for rest of the year.
When does the gnashing of teeth start?
Zats Muccarello
Grinder
Seems to me like Skjei is the most deserving to sit out.
- Jul 20, 2005
- 4,925
- 2,332
I'd be fine with Hajek sitting out a game. Taking a minute might help his game.
I'd be fine with a LD rotation. Hajek and Lindgren would still end up playing a lot of minutes.
The only thing I am not fine with is Staal playing every game and people pretending he is not awful.
I'd be fine with a LD rotation. Hajek and Lindgren would still end up playing a lot of minutes.
The only thing I am not fine with is Staal playing every game and people pretending he is not awful.
I think there is no pretending about the quality of his play. I do believe that there is some sort of a LD rotation. I just hope that includes Staal. Which it should. As Henke is in a work share , no reason Staal can’t be.
I would rather sit Skjei since he is a veteran and should be playing much better. Hajek I would let him work out the funk on his own.
SlapshotTheMovie
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2013
- 3,101
- 1,174
Skjei isn';t playing his best hockey but he is still playing better then Staal this season.
offdacrossbar
misfit fanboy
if you listen to Quinn’s presser before the game yesterday it was pretty apparent that he’s got to get staal back in there and when he was pressed by one of the questions asking why does he have to get him back in there his answer was basically he’s a good player and we need him
Quinn basically said the six best players will play so I don’t understand how that means Staal gets back in the lineup I’m confused
Quinn basically said the six best players will play so I don’t understand how that means Staal gets back in the lineup I’m confused
Latest posts
-
GDT: #60 | Flyers at Penguins | Thursday, February 27, 2025 | 7:30 PM | Disney Stuff- Latest: BackToTheBrierePatch
-
-
