Marty St. Louis
- Thread starter pld459666
- 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
- Status
The trade is one thing - and even if MSL was excelling, I'd still have problems with the short-sightedness of it all.
The really incredible part of it all is this team, over the course of 2 years, drastically changed the way it plays the game, yet the big name offensive talent STILL cannot provide offense consistently.
Hell this year, for some of them, they can't even do it inconsistently.
The really incredible part of it all is this team, over the course of 2 years, drastically changed the way it plays the game, yet the big name offensive talent STILL cannot provide offense consistently.
Hell this year, for some of them, they can't even do it inconsistently.
Blueshirt Special
Shady Brey
I think the MSL trade has been (partially) the victim of the cumulative effect of management's overall style, and other recent deals.
I think a lot of people feel that Ranger management has blown the chance to build a long-lasting competitive team, and the MSL trade is the culmination and thus the realization (to the fans) that we are NOT (once again!) building for the future. And...the MSL trade is a typical representation of what the organization has done in the past that has failed miserably. ie A past his prime superstar for future picks.
Taken in isolation, maybe this dosen't get so much ire. But this is coming on the heels of the Nash deal, etc. And it is sinking in, just where we are and what Sather's intentions are. (win now)
So, what I'm saying is that frustrations are bubbling up and it's bleeding over into the MSL deal, possibly skewing what people (fans) think, but that does not mean it is in fact a bad deal, nor does it mean we cannot in fact win now (this or next year).
A fact is this: We are in the 2nd round against one of the most talented teams in the league and we one a game in pittsburgh.
Obviously tonight is a huge game. I think we have a shot. I also think that given where we are at, the MSL trade was a good one.
We shall see.
I think a lot of people feel that Ranger management has blown the chance to build a long-lasting competitive team, and the MSL trade is the culmination and thus the realization (to the fans) that we are NOT (once again!) building for the future. And...the MSL trade is a typical representation of what the organization has done in the past that has failed miserably. ie A past his prime superstar for future picks.
Taken in isolation, maybe this dosen't get so much ire. But this is coming on the heels of the Nash deal, etc. And it is sinking in, just where we are and what Sather's intentions are. (win now)
So, what I'm saying is that frustrations are bubbling up and it's bleeding over into the MSL deal, possibly skewing what people (fans) think, but that does not mean it is in fact a bad deal, nor does it mean we cannot in fact win now (this or next year).
A fact is this: We are in the 2nd round against one of the most talented teams in the league and we one a game in pittsburgh.
Obviously tonight is a huge game. I think we have a shot. I also think that given where we are at, the MSL trade was a good one.
We shall see.
jerseyjinx94
I jinx players.
No no. You misunderstand. Read my original post. This horse has been beaten. Saying that TB has posted every day about this just strengthens that point. Why is this still being discussed? Everyone knows who does and doesn't like the deal, at this point let's just analyze his play and hope he carries us to a Cup. Why keep re-analyzing the trade every hour? Am I not being clear or something?
jerseyjinx94
I jinx players.
Fair enough. I agree with everything you said. Let's enjoy where we are and hope they can win tonight.
jerseyjinx94
I jinx players.
I can respect that. And I do agree that, for some ******* reason, this team can't score goals - ever. But let's turn our attention to Game 4 and revisit the trade later, and just analyze his play in the playoffs. Like it or not, he's a New York Ranger. And we need him to step up his game immediately.
Gardner McKay
RIP, Jimmy.
What part of Callahan's excellent playoff resume (.38 PPG) makes you believe that would have been the case?
Oh but wait. Callahan provides "toughness". We would have swept the Flyers with the almighty Ryan Callahan.
pld459666
Registered User
Personally I think we are a better team with St. Louis than with Callahan.
That said, I do not like giving up 1st round picks three drafts in a row and this deal still has the potential for that.
And while Callahan has not gotten better as the playoffs start, the compete level of getting to and battling in front of the net (the actual toughness this team does not have) is missed.
I think that having that presense in front in the Philly series after game three changes the dynamics of the series.
Flyers made adjustments to the PK that negated our PP. Those adjustments are much harder to make when you have one dedicated defenceman fighting with a player in front of your goalie.
Gardner McKay
RIP, Jimmy.
I agree with you on both counts in the first bolded. No one likes giving up first rounders and I think we are a much better team.
As far as the second bolded goes...
Pouliot was doing that but has stopped. Kreider was great at that. Any one can go to the front of the net. Most just don't.
The point I was referring to was that MSL was the difference in the Flyers series. I dont believe that to be the case. I think we could've beaten them in 7 with Callahan too
Gardner McKay
RIP, Jimmy.
MSL had 6 points IIRC? Yes. He was the difference. If history repeats itself (and it always does), Callahan has 2-3 points in that series. MSL was the difference maker in half of our wins. Who is to say we win this games without him?
All of this is a moot point if Rick Nash did what he was supposed to do. We could just as easily be up 2-1 on the PenRefs if Nash pulled his head out of his rectum and could have beat Philly in 5 or 6 as well.
I agree that it sucks what we gave up for MSL but I have no beef with him. It is Rick Nash.
In hindsight, it sure looks like this team should've made the Nash trade OR the MSL trade. Not both. And yes, I agree I'd rather make the MSL trade because I think Nash is a sissy.
The most frustrating part of these playoffs so far is that Dubinsky or Callahan would've been able to provide an element that this team sorely lacks.
pld459666
Registered User
And that is a soft mentality.
The willingness to battle to be and stay in front is lacking on this team. Callahan has it. Pouliot is not consistent with it which is why he has been a gypsy throughout his career. Kreider is getting there. I hope he keeps it up. He was gaining that idiot factor that helped make him a presence every night. Imposing your will on the opponent in any manner possible.
we have missed that from him.
Gardner McKay
RIP, Jimmy.
I completely disagree on Callahan. In previous years I would say you are spot on. However, he was invisible to me for most of this year. I don't know that he would have brought any additional element that this team is lacking.
You don't think Callahan standing in front of the net would have helped this historically bad powerplay?
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
Interesting how Callahan slumped this season and people are convinced that he's done yet St. Louis has slumped here but it's only a matter of time until he breaks out.
Gardner McKay
RIP, Jimmy.
I think having Kreider available to go to the net with his 6'4 frame would help much more. Outside of his "front of the net presence" I don't see anything else that Callahan would have changed. He was invisible for most of this year.
He was invisible because Vigneault and the team were adjusting to a style that funnels almost all of the play to the middle of the ice. Ill be the first to admit thats not Callahan's strong suit.
That said, this team's inability to play a different style when the middle of the ice is taken away sure seems like its going to be the determining factor in sending them home.
- Jul 20, 2005
- 4,924
- 2,330
It might be interesting if the numbers didn't so obviously point it in that direction.
Player A
'10-'11 GPG: .383 PPG: .800
'11-'12 GPG: .382 PPG: .711
'12-'13 GPG: .355 PPG: .689
'13-'14 GPG: .244 PPG: .556
Player B
'10-'11 GPG: .378 PPG: 1.207
'11-'12 GPG: .325 PPG: .961
'12-'13 GPG: .354 PPG: 1.25
'13-'14 GPG: .468 PPG: .984
If you had to pick, which player is slumping and which player is declining? To make it fair I will give you two guesses.
Singn'..
count me as one of those waiting for the breakout. May never happen, but you have a guy whose worse production in a full season in 11 years was 25 goals and 61 points; Cally'e best was 29 goals and 54 points. Marty's been very consistent, around the 30+ goal, 70+ point range each season. Predicting when the downfall begins is always tough, even though that measuring stick in RangerLand is when you're 35 and over and join the Rangers, but this season, prior to joining the Rangers, Marty was at 29 goals, so one would be thinking he still has something left in the tank, perhaps even for next year at a clip that should outpace Cally and hopefully take pressure of Nash and Richards and maybe you'd see the added benefit of them scoring. Hasn't happened. That is the obvious, but it's tough not to think that St. Louis would not breakout, well, it was tough during the first 10 games, now it's easier. Regarding Cally, people are thinking Mike York too much, I guess. One must be little concerned regarding durability, but at the same time, it's not like he's missing 40 games each season. Tough to give a big contract to a guy you think is only good for 60-65 games per year, and even tougher to give a 4-5 year contract. Can't say that shouldn't be a concern, although personally I am not going to make the judgment that he's on the decline just yet. I invest in companies - I look for trends - simple stuff, don't get the big hits, but slow and steady.
count me as one of those waiting for the breakout. May never happen, but you have a guy whose worse production in a full season in 11 years was 25 goals and 61 points; Cally'e best was 29 goals and 54 points. Marty's been very consistent, around the 30+ goal, 70+ point range each season. Predicting when the downfall begins is always tough, even though that measuring stick in RangerLand is when you're 35 and over and join the Rangers, but this season, prior to joining the Rangers, Marty was at 29 goals, so one would be thinking he still has something left in the tank, perhaps even for next year at a clip that should outpace Cally and hopefully take pressure of Nash and Richards and maybe you'd see the added benefit of them scoring. Hasn't happened. That is the obvious, but it's tough not to think that St. Louis would not breakout, well, it was tough during the first 10 games, now it's easier. Regarding Cally, people are thinking Mike York too much, I guess. One must be little concerned regarding durability, but at the same time, it's not like he's missing 40 games each season. Tough to give a big contract to a guy you think is only good for 60-65 games per year, and even tougher to give a 4-5 year contract. Can't say that shouldn't be a concern, although personally I am not going to make the judgment that he's on the decline just yet. I invest in companies - I look for trends - simple stuff, don't get the big hits, but slow and steady.
Last edited:
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
I have some interesting numbers too:
Player A:
March 21, 1985
Player B:
June 18, 1975
ReggieDunlop68
hey hanrahan!
That may be true.
But even with a quick look at those trends, player A and player B stats won't cross each other for another 4-7 years, so we should be golden when we re-sign player B to a contract that will round out near his 50's.
Blueshirt Special
Shady Brey
That may be true.
But even with a quick look at those trends, player A and player B stats won't cross each other for another 4-7 years, so we should be golden when we re-sign player B to a contract that will round out near his 50's.
It's the youth movement we've always wanted!!
JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK
Twenty f*ckin years
- Oct 8, 2010
- 80,069
- 17,709
I don't see how that disproves the theory that, of the two players, Callahan is the one who has been declining. And, even IF St. Louis starts to decline, it doesn't change the fact that Callahan's production has been dropping every year for the past few years.
- Status
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Fetisov proposes a two game Russia - USA hockey summit- Latest: Silky Johnson
