Toggle sidebar

Confirmed with Link: Rangers Agree to Terms with Matt Puempel

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
NCRanger said:
Exactly. With first, second line, and power play ice-time, Puempel is probably a 20 goal/35 point scorer.

Doesn't mean the Rangers should be using him that way.

Fast and Lindberg are what they are, but do not have the same offensive upside.

Depends what LV is looking for when they draft a Ranger.
Click to expand...

I think Lindberg has a higher ceiling than Puempel. He won the Swedish equivalent of the Conn Smythe. He has the tools to be a solid middle-6 center with PP minutes
 
How does Puempel have a higher offensively ceiling than Lindberg or Fast? The guy can't even crack lineups as an NHL regular. He barely has any upside. He's 23/24 now.

Lindberg had 28 pts, 13 goals in his first season in only 68 games. This season he had 20 pts after having an absolutely garbage first half. Fast had a 30 pt year last year.

I don't see any tools from Puempel that make him particularly better offensively. Puckhandling? I'd say Lindberg is better. Shooting? Sure, better than Fast at it, but probably not Lindberg. Playmaking? He sucks at passing. IQ? He's not some super smart player.

Puempel is a very limited player offensively, and really won't have any impact defensively. Tldr; He's the definition of a useless player.
 
NCRanger said:
Exactly. With first, second line, and power play ice-time, Puempel is probably a 20 goal/35 point scorer.
Click to expand...
Wow. Puempel in his career has 10 goals in 79 games. This year he managed 6 iin 40. And now he is going to net 20?

He has size, he has speed and yet he cannot actually do anything on the ice. And pretty sure he has no idea of where the defensive zone is.
Doesn't mean the Rangers should be using him that way.
Click to expand...
He belongs as a top 9 forward only slightly more than I do.
Fast and Lindberg are what they are, but do not have the same offensive upside.
Click to expand...
What they are are legit NHL players. What he is, he is. A waiver wire level player.
 
True Blue said:
Wow. Puempel in his career has 10 goals in 79 games. This year he managed 6 iin 40. And now he is going to net 20?

He has size, he has speed and yet he cannot actually do anything on the ice. And pretty sure he has no idea of where the defensive zone is.

He belongs as a top 9 forward only slightly more than I do.

What they are are legit NHL players. What he is, he is. A waiver wire level player.
Click to expand...

And when has Puempel played with top line players consistently?

Just because he probably could net 20 if he played 20 minutes a night on a top line doesn't mean he wouldn't be a -35.

Fast or Lindberg would not be in the Top 6 anywhere they would play -- even on an expansion team. They are QUALITY 3rd line players that could chip in occasionally on a second line. They aren't solely offensive minded players that get limited ice time in limited appearances.

Puempel is a waste playing on a 4th line. He's an offensive minded player. He's not good. I'm not implying that. I'm merely stating that on what would most likely be a bad team, he could be somewhat of a point producer. There are plenty of cases throughout history that a first year expansion team has a guy or two that are generally bad players that led the team in scoring just because they had some experience and then got double the ice time.
 
NCRanger said:
And when has Puempel played with top line players consistently?
Click to expand...
And when has he ever shown that he needs to be inserted on top?
Fast or Lindberg would not be in the Top 6 anywhere they would play -- even on an expansion team. They are QUALITY 3rd line players that could chip in occasionally on a second line. They aren't solely offensive minded players that get limited ice time in limited appearances.
Click to expand...
No one is saying that they are top 6.
Puempel is a waste playing on a 4th line. He's an offensive minded player.
Click to expand...
He is a waste on any line.
He's not good. I'm not implying that. I'm merely stating that on what would most likely be a bad team, he could be somewhat of a point producer.
Click to expand...
If he is not good, then why would he be on the top-6?
 
Amazing Kreiderman said:
I would go as far as to say we would not have re-signed him, if we didn't have the expansion draft
Click to expand...

we wouldnt have resigned him early, for sure

i'd have QO'd him with an eye towards a swap for another team's young top 50 pick who similarly hadn't 'put it all together yet' - as with Werek/Lindberg or Etem/Jensen
 
Vitto79 said:
Jeesh give the kid a chance lol . I'm sure the rangers are ok w paying him to play in Hartford if he doesn't perform for a year . No cap hit
Click to expand...

I have nothing against Puempel, but he's a dime-a-dozen player. Waiver fodder. They signed him to be expansion draft compliant, nothing more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom