Yet, Stepan had no problem setting up Gaborik for most of the year.
I think Tortorella is over thinking this...
Noted.http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/rangers/right_to_left_x8yq7qtfK1PO95bRlCQ8wK
Rangers’ Gaborik switches sides
By LARRY BROOKS
Last Updated: 5:24 AM, January 14, 2013
Posted: 2:06 AM, January 14, 2013
That's all fine and good.
But Nash has played alot mroe LW than Gaborik has throughout his career and would be better suited to making that shift.
Nash is also a Left handed shot.
Still makes no sense to have Gaborik shift wings.
If Gabby does not rack up a lot of goals before the deadline I think we seriously should consider moving him . He has been and always will be a fragile player . We could get in on the Getzlaf/Perry grab at the deadline and I would sooner have one of those guys playing the Pen/Bruins/Flyers in the playoffs than Gabby .
Flame away .
Our even strength scoring wasn't a problem last year, so i'm much, much more interested in what we do with the groups on the power play than on even strength.
If Gabby does not rack up a lot of goals before the deadline I think we seriously should consider moving him . He has been and always will be a fragile player . We could get in on the Getzlaf/Perry grab at the deadline and I would sooner have one of those guys playing the Pen/Bruins/Flyers in the playoffs than Gabby .
I know we lose a year because Getzlaf & Perry would need to be signed while Gabby already is for next season . Anaheim could possibly consider the deal because they would have a signed asset in Gabby for 2014 and then they could move him at the 2015 deadline for something .
I want a Cup...we missed out on an easy crack at it last year because we did not make the crucial moves . Sometimes you gotta give to get !!! Flame away .
Richards took time to adjust to playing on this team. He admitted that much himself. It had very little to do with suddenly getting the right players on his line. If Gaborik was so perfect for him, why wasn't he producing early on in the season where he started on a line with Gaborik?
Nobody is "comparing" Nash and Callahan. However, what nyr2k2 and I both demonstrated to you is that if you remove the PP production from a players point totals, you can make just about anyone look "pedestrian." Take away Shea Weber's PP numbers and he's a 25pt D-man and not a perennial Norris candidate.
Tortorella needed someone to replace Hagelin after he was suspended. Had he not been suspended, there's a high probability that he would have never even cracked the lineup. If it was Callahan who was suspended, he likely would have started on the 2nd line. If he was so perfect for the role, then he wouldn't have been removed from that role as soon as Hags returned to the lineup. Hell, I don't even think he lasted the entire game on the first line.
Right now, Hagelin and Callahan are both better options in the "role" that you're speaking of. Until Kreider can prove that he's a better option than either of them, he belongs on the 3rd line or in Hartford.
Richards took time to adjust to playing on this team. He admitted that much himself. It had very little to do with suddenly getting the right players on his line. If Gaborik was so perfect for him, why wasn't he producing early on in the season where he started on a line with Gaborik?
Nobody is "comparing" Nash and Callahan. However, what nyr2k2 and I both demonstrated to you is that if you remove the PP production from a players point totals, you can make just about anyone look "pedestrian." Take away Shea Weber's PP numbers and he's a 25pt D-man and not a perennial Norris candidate.
Tortorella needed someone to replace Hagelin after he was suspended. Had he not been suspended, there's a high probability that he would have never even cracked the lineup. If it was Callahan who was suspended, he likely would have started on the 2nd line. If he was so perfect for the role, then he wouldn't have been removed from that role as soon as Hags returned to the lineup. Hell, I don't even think he lasted the entire game on the first line.
Right now, Hagelin and Callahan are both better options in the "role" that you're speaking of. Until Kreider can prove that he's a better option than either of them, he belongs on the 3rd line or in Hartford.
If you do believe that Kreider is a better fit on the 3rd line and Callahan is a better fit on the second, we just have fundamentally different opinions and we'll need to agree to disagree.
Yeah but even if either is a better option than Kreider in the top 6, but that will make Kreider useless. This way we may be weakening the top 6 a little but are significantly upgrading the 3rd line. Just watch we'll be getting Kreider is a bust thread because he's playing with mediocre offensive players on the 3rd line.
I'm far more concerned with the team's success as a whole than I am about Kreider being useless. If he can't find a way to contribute as a 3rd liner, then he's certainly not ready for a top-six role.
It could work out well so might as well try it early on. For those who have short term memory:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3N7lMPgKOCg
Good point.
Heres a quick hint when evaluating a player. Anytime you find yourself about to say "(Player X) should be in the top 6 - hes just invisible because hes on a line without talent," - just stop yourself.
Good players - players that eventually make their way into a consistent top 6 player find a way to contribute if they're on the bottom lines.
If agree to disagree means "let me boil down your stance into something that's not really what you said" then I'm not sure I'm on board with that.
I'm far more concerned with the team's success as a whole than I am about Kreider being useless. If he can't find a way to contribute as a 3rd liner, then he's certainly not ready for a top-six role. For all of the times I heard "His speed and size will make him a 3rd liner at worst" there seems to be a lot of people trying to spoon feed him a spot in the top-six.
Kreider has already had plenty of bust threads. They're the least of my concerns. Player evaluation isn't this boards strong suit.