Toggle sidebar

Post-Game Talk: Panthers at Rangers

  • Thread starter Thread starter *Bob Richards*
  • Start date Start date
I've seen a few mentions here that Johnny Mitchell was a loss to us because he fit this system and he plays Torts style.
Johnny Mitchell sucked with us and did next to nothing in his short time on broadway. Don't get it twisted and bunch his name in with Dubi, Arty, Prust, and Feds...
 
New Yawk Ranguhs said:
I've seen a few mentions here that Johnny Mitchell was a loss to us because he fit this system and he plays Torts style.
Johnny Mitchell sucked with us and did next to nothing in his short time on broadway. Don't get it twisted and bunch his name in with Dubi, Arty, Prust, and Feds...
Click to expand...

He has more offense in his pinky than anyone on our 4th line.
 
16 To Stanley said:
He has more offense in his pinky than anyone on our 4th line.
Click to expand...

This. I'd take Mitchell over anyone on the bottom 6.

And he was probably the 6th best guy on the bottom 6 last year.

This tells what's happened to our horrendous bottom half of the lineup. The worst in the NHL.

Halpern over Mitchell. lol. Insanity.
 
Kershaw said:
This. I'd take Mitchell over anyone on the bottom 6.

And he was probably the 6th best guy on the bottom 6 last year.

This tells what's happened to our horrendous bottom half of the lineup. The worst in the NHL.
Click to expand...

I don't know. I just can't see, talent wise, how this years bunch is worse than last years. That's including the bottom 6.

For me, its obvious this system does not work for the bunch that we have here right now. It can't be coincidental that every single forward on our team, with the exception of Hags and Nash, have had stretches of complete futility. this system makes everyone look bad. It's not their style, grinding is not why Gaby, Nash, or Richy became NHL players.
 
Kershaw said:
This. I'd take Mitchell over anyone on the bottom 6.

And he was probably the 6th best guy on the bottom 6 last year.

This tells what's happened to our horrendous bottom half of the lineup. The worst in the NHL.

Halpern over Mitchell. lol. Insanity.
Click to expand...

Well said. Mitchell wasn't great compared to last year's bottom guys but he is head and shoulders above almost everyone we have in those positions now.

Miller should be the weakest link, the guy finding his way amid other competent players. Not because he's a bad player, but because he's a rookie and he's up a little earlier than he should be. Unfortunately, a lot of times, he looks like the only guy who's trying to get the puck on net. That's not good.
 
Kershaw said:
This. I'd take Mitchell over anyone on the bottom 6.

And he was probably the 6th best guy on the bottom 6 last year.

This tells what's happened to our horrendous bottom half of the lineup. The worst in the NHL.
Click to expand...

No, that's not true. Boyle was bad most of the year, Prust was awful at anything related to offense, Feds was Feds (the epitome of average). Rupp was absolutely useless except in the WC.

Johnny Malkin is an alright bottom six player who thinks he's better than that. The bottom six this year is just as bad as the bottom six was last year. The bottom six TWO years ago was great, and the way Prust is playing in MTL he'd make it better this year. But the difference in the team isn't any upgrade or downgrade in the bottom six, they both sucked.

Except I guess having Dubi on the 3rd line. But i'll take Rick Nash on the top line over Dubi on the third.
 
BlueshirtBlitz said:
No, that's not true. Boyle was bad most of the year, Prust was awful at anything related to offense, Feds was Feds (the epitome of average). Rupp was absolutely useless except in the WC.

Johnny Malkin is an alright bottom six player who thinks he's better than that. The bottom six this year is just as bad as the bottom six was last year. The bottom six TWO years ago was great, and the way Prust is playing in MTL he'd make it better this year. But the difference in the team isn't any upgrade or downgrade in the bottom six, they both sucked.

Except I guess having Dubi on the 3rd line. But i'll take Rick Nash on the top line over Dubi on the third.
Click to expand...

Are you serious.

Dubinsky, Anisimov, Prust, Feds, Boyle, JMalkin in the bottom six is three thousand times better than Halpern, Powe, Bickel, Asham, Pyatt. It almost makes me sick how much worse it is.
 
16 To Stanley said:
Are you serious.

Dubinsky, Anisimov, Prust, Feds, Boyle, JMalkin in the bottom six is three thousand times better than Halpern, Powe, Bickel, Asham, Pyatt. It almost makes me sick how much worse it is.
Click to expand...

Anisimov was in the top six most of last year. Prust, Feds, Boyle and JMalkin of last year are not heads and shoulders better over what we have now. Dubi is the x-factor, although besides puck possession he was bad last year. And again, I take Nash over Dubi.
 
I don't even think there should be a debate when trying to figure out what's going on with this team. I initially thought that we could chalk it up to turnover and the need for time to build chemistry, but I was still in denial about last season when in that mindset. Last season was a ridiculous run. We all like to complain about bad Ranger luck, but last year basically everything that could have broken the Rangers way, well, broke the Rangers way.

1. Lundqvist was playing at another level. He is playing well this season, but not well enough to win games on his own, which he did several times last year.

2. Girardi had a career year, and McDonagh hopefully had a year that he will repeat again soon, but regardless they both played better than their current norm. This, coupled with Lundqvist's play got them through the time without Staal.

3. The Penguins were dealing with serious injuries all season. This missed opportunity loomed largest after the Pens were eliminated from the playoffs, but don't downplay the psychological impact Crosby's absence had on the confidence of his divisional opponents, especially the Rangers.

4. Just plain luck. The Rangers won a disproportionate amount of 1 goal/close games last season. We chalked it up to the team pulling together/having jam/being clutch/whatever, but in a league with this much parity, I think the biggest factor was luck. They haven't been so lucky this year.

All of that said, the bottom line to me is that Tortorella, or his system, needs to go, and this became true as soon as Rick Nash pulled on a Rangers' sweater. Grind/jam/grind is a good way to get as much as you can out of a team lacking talent, and it can make you look like a genius when you have luck on your side, but it's not the way to win it all in the modern NHL. The Rangers have the personnel to hang with anyone right now, and they need to be allowed to show that. There is no excuse for the fact that scoring goals is a problem for this team, and the fact that hasn't at least made Torts budge yet completely blows my mind.
 
Synergy27 said:
I don't even think there should be a debate when trying to figure out what's going on with this team. I initially thought that we could chalk it up to turnover and the need for time to build chemistry, but I was still in denial about last season when in that mindset. Last season was a ridiculous run. We all like to complain about bad Ranger luck, but last year basically everything that could have broken the Rangers way, well, broke the Rangers way.

1. Lundqvist was playing at another level. He is playing well this season, but not well enough to win games on his own, which he did several times last year.

2. Girardi had a career year, and McDonagh hopefully had a year that he will repeat again soon, but regardless they both played better than their current norm. This, coupled with Lundqvist's play got them through the time without Staal.

3. The Penguins were dealing with serious injuries all season. This missed opportunity loomed largest after the Pens were eliminated from the playoffs, but don't downplay the psychological impact Crosby's absence had on the confidence of his divisional opponents, especially the Rangers.

4. Just plain luck. The Rangers won a disproportionate amount of 1 goal/close games last season. We chalked it up to the team pulling together/having jam/being clutch/whatever, but in a league with this much parity, I think the biggest factor was luck. They haven't been so lucky this year.

All of that said, the bottom line to me is that Tortorella, or his system, needs to go, and this became true as soon as Rick Nash pulled on a Rangers' sweater. Grind/jam/grind is a good way to get as much as you can out of a team lacking talent, and it can make you look like a genius when you have luck on your side, but it's not the way to win it all in the modern NHL. The Rangers have the personnel to hang with anyone right now, and they need to be allowed to show that. There is no excuse for the fact that scoring goals is a problem for this team, and the fact that hasn't at least made Torts budge yet completely blows my mind.
Click to expand...

Usually I vehemently disagree with you, but I agree with most of this. I think the team COULD'VE adapted to the Torts system, as they did last year, but for whatever reason they're not.

Crosby missing and the fact McD and Girardi were better last year than they are this year are two of the biggest reasons we went as far as we did.
 
BlueshirtBlitz said:
Usually I vehemently disagree with you, but I agree with most of this. I think the team COULD'VE adapted to the Torts system, as they did last year, but for whatever reason they're not.

Crosby missing and the fact McD and Girardi were better last year than they are this year are two of the biggest reasons we went as far as we did.
Click to expand...

We beat the Penguins when Crosby was in the line-up and one game where he wasn't in the line-up. We lost 4 games to the Penguins, 2 of which were without Crosby.

Whatever "psychological edge" was there to be had was maybe true for other divisional opponents, not the Rangers.
 
ImIdaho said:
We beat the Penguins when Crosby was in the line-up and one game where he wasn't in the line-up. We lost 4 games to the Penguins, 2 of which were without Crosby.

Whatever "psychological edge" was there to be had was maybe true for other divisional opponents, not the Rangers.
Click to expand...

If the Pens team had Crosby all year it'd very likely be the one we see this year. We would not have won the Atlantic. I don't think it's a psychological edge, it's the fact the best player in the game, who happens to be in our division, was out for most of the season and not 100% ready in the playoffs.
 
BlueshirtBlitz said:
If the Pens team had Crosby all year it'd very likely be the one we see this year. We would not have won the Atlantic. I don't think it's a psychological edge, it's the fact the best player in the game, who happens to be in our division, was out for most of the season and not 100% ready in the playoffs.
Click to expand...

That I can agree with. Definitely. I just didn't like the way Synergy27 worded it; as if with or without Crosby we had some kind of psychological edge. That's due to the Penguins living in the Rangers' heads, rent free, with or without Crosby and/or Malkin.

This team is just ****ing pathetic against the Penguins. Even when we won the Atlantic and Eastern Conference, Pittsburgh still whooped our ***** 4 games to 2.
 
What I observed last night...you can't win playing with short sticks . We must have the shortest sticks in the league...that puts a little different twist on it LOL .
 
New Yawk Ranguhs said:
I don't know. I just can't see, talent wise, how this years bunch is worse than last years. That's including the bottom 6.

For me, its obvious this system does not work for the bunch that we have here right now. It can't be coincidental that every single forward on our team, with the exception of Hags and Nash, have had stretches of complete futility. this system makes everyone look bad. It's not their style, grinding is not why Gaby, Nash, or Richy became NHL players.
Click to expand...

I dunno, I think it's pales in comparisons. Last year's team was way more talented than this year's team AINEC for me.
 
haveandare said:
Well said. Mitchell wasn't great compared to last year's bottom guys but he is head and shoulders above almost everyone we have in those positions now.

Miller should be the weakest link, the guy finding his way amid other competent players. Not because he's a bad player, but because he's a rookie and he's up a little earlier than he should be. Unfortunately, a lot of times, he looks like the only guy who's trying to get the puck on net. That's not good.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Miller has been pretty terrible since his first multigoal game.
 
BlueshirtBlitz said:
No, that's not true. Boyle was bad most of the year, Prust was awful at anything related to offense, Feds was Feds (the epitome of average). Rupp was absolutely useless except in the WC.
Click to expand...

Boyle was bad last year? He had 26 pts last year which is on line with 3rd line center production. He did this with 30% zone starts in his own end and extensive PK minutes. Very underrated last year.

Prust was awful lol. What a joke. He was a shot generating machine and great hustler on the cycle and on the PK. He does have hands of stone, but was a very big reason why we had IMO, one of the better bottom 6 in the regular season.

Feds was a great defensive winger and a great player on the cycle like Prust was. He is an average hockey player, yes, but average is much better than the atrocity we're rolling out this season.

Johnny Malkin is an alright bottom six player who thinks he's better than that. The bottom six this year is just as bad as the bottom six was last year. The bottom six TWO years ago was great, and the way Prust is playing in MTL he'd make it better this year. But the difference in the team isn't any upgrade or downgrade in the bottom six, they both sucked.
Click to expand...

Wow, completely with the opposite idea. This is by far the worst bottom 6 in the league statistically and probably on-ice play. Last year's bottom 6 had plenty of good production all around.

Except I guess having Dubi on the 3rd line. But i'll take Rick Nash on the top line over Dubi on the third.
Click to expand...

Is the difference of Nash and Anisimov on line 1 worth all the loss of depth and missing out on the playoffs? (or making it and getting butts kicked by Montreal or Pittsburgh)
 
Kershaw said:
Boyle was bad last year? He had 26 pts last year which is on line with 3rd line center production. He did this with 30% zone starts in his own end and extensive PK minutes. Very underrated last year.

Prust was awful lol. What a joke. He was a shot generating machine and great hustler on the cycle and on the PK. He does have hands of stone, but was a very big reason why we had IMO, one of the better bottom 6 in the regular season.

Feds was a great defensive winger and a great player on the cycle like Prust was. He is an average hockey player, yes, but average is much better than the atrocity we're rolling out this season.



Wow, completely with the opposite idea. This is by far the worst bottom 6 in the league statistically and probably on-ice play. Last year's bottom 6 had plenty of good production all around.



Is the difference of Nash and Anisimov on line 1 worth all the loss of depth and missing out on the playoffs? (or making it and getting butts kicked by Montreal or Pittsburgh)
Click to expand...

Bull. What you just said Prust did is what our bottom six does now!

And so sure, i'm sick of arguing about Boyle so I won't. But Boyle is the same Boyle. If he blows now that's not managements fault.
 
BlueshirtBlitz said:
Not according to the advanced stats.

Which you JUST USED to call out Halpern.
Click to expand...

This team has more top heavy talent, no doubt about it.

If this was an 82 game season, I wouldn't worry after 30 games. We'd likely contend for the division with the Devils and Penguins in an 82 game season.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom