Toggle sidebar

Confirmed with Link: Rangers extend D Will Borgen

zlev said:
he's been very good for weeks but last night his pairing got MURDERED
Click to expand...
The d were absolutely victimized by their own forwards. Panarin combining with Kreider for Aho's goal. Panarin again combining with Zibanejad on the fourth goal. Zibanejad playing with his stick and not body again with Staal on the puck battle, making Miller have to cheat to Staal. Panarin turning the puck over all over the place.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheWrongWay and bl02
will1066 said:
The d were absolutely victimized by their own forwards. Panarin combining with Kreider for Aho's goal. Panarin again combining with Zibanejad on the fourth goal. Zibanejad playing with his stick and not body again with Staal on the puck battle, making Miller have to cheat to Staal. Panarin turning the puck over all over the place.
Click to expand...

a couple of bad plays by forwards doesn't explain how they got throttled the entire time they were on the ice.
 
LokiDog said:
I got killed for saying that when he had only been here for 10 games. I guess I interrupted the honey moon phase. Honestly, some posters found that opinion so offensive I think they wanted to ban me.
Click to expand...

What would you say if I shit on Igor for allowing a bad goal with 15 second left after a stretch of bad play? Probably something like "it's one play shit happens". And Borgen is not supposed to be part of our core and is making 1/3 of that. I don't get why the apologists for certain players understand that one play doesn't define you but when they don't particularly like the player one play defines you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: will1066
SnowblindNYR said:
What would you say if I shit on Igor for allowing a bad goal with 15 second left after a stretch of bad play? Probably something like "it's one play shit happens". And Borgen is not supposed to be part of our core and is making 1/3 of that. I don't get why the apologists for certain players understand that one play doesn't define you but when they don't particularly like the player one play defines you.
Click to expand...

SB, I’m like top 5 most vocal we shouldn’t have re-signed him and I don’t want to pay any goalie over 10M people on this board, so you’re barking up the wrong tree. And even then, contract aside (I didn’t mention Borg’s contract) at the very least Igor is a starting goalie. There isn’t any question of that. I don’t even hate Borgen’s contract for what bottom pair will cost as the cap goes up. My point was only that if you think he’s a genuine top 4 solution you will likely be disappointed. If you expect him to be a reliable bottom pairing guy, you probably won’t be.
 
zlev said:
a couple of bad plays by forwards doesn't explain how they got throttled the entire time they were on the ice.
Click to expand...

Canes got so many high danger chances plus extra zone time second chances because the forwards kept giving the puck back to Carolina. Particularly Panarin. If you rewatch the game and iso on him, you'll see. He was the Canes' best assist man.

The book is out anyway that this team can't handle fast and hard-checking in-your-face teams.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Boris Zubov
LokiDog said:
SB, I’m like top 5 most vocal we shouldn’t have re-signed him and I don’t want to pay any goalie over 10M people on this board, so you’re barking up the wrong tree. And even then, contract aside (I didn’t mention Borg’s contract) at the very least Igor is a starting goalie. There isn’t any question of that. I don’t even hate Borgen’s contract for what bottom pair will cost as the cap goes up. My point was only that if you think he’s a genuine top 4 solution you will likely be disappointed. If you expect him to be a reliable bottom pairing guy, you probably won’t be.
Click to expand...

That may be true but one play isn't the reason for it. At the end of the day we need time to figure out if Borgen was a bad signing. He could turn out to be Brendan Smith or he could be our Klein or Stralman. Hell Florida's Mikola. My only issue here is that he HAS been good with us and we're not breaking the bank. I personally am happy to roll the dice. And even if someone isn't, this isn't this backbreaking contract that some of the hysterical responses to it are warranted.
 
SnowblindNYR said:
That may be true but one play isn't the reason for it. At the end of the day we need time to figure out if Borgen was a bad signing. He could turn out to be Brendan Smith or he could be our Klein or Stralman. Hell Florida's Mikola. My only issue here is that he HAS been good with us and we're not breaking the bank. I personally am happy to roll the dice. And even if someone isn't, this isn't this backbreaking contract that some of the hysterical responses to it are warranted.
Click to expand...

Let's just get it over with and have someone paste Kakko's face on Borgen's body, because that's what it is. They see Borgen and project Kakko on him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheWrongWay and SnowblindNYR
SnowblindNYR said:
That may be true but one play isn't the reason for it. At the end of the day we need time to figure out if Borgen was a bad signing. He could turn out to be Brendan Smith or he could be our Klein or Stralman. Hell Florida's Mikola. My only issue here is that he HAS been good with us and we're not breaking the bank. I personally am happy to roll the dice. And even if someone isn't, this isn't this backbreaking contract that some of the hysterical responses to it are warranted.
Click to expand...

Well, like I said, I never mentioned his contract. I don’t even think his cap hit is going to be bad for a reliable bottom pairing guy with the way the cap is projected to rise. I’m fine with Borgen on the Rangers and not even upset with his contract. My post when he signed it was positive. I am only concerned with the role people expect him to fill. If you want him to play 18-20 minutes (long term, not this 16 game audition, but over the next several years) and be in the top four, I think you’re setting yourself up for disappointment and will in turn eventually treat Borgen as a whipping boy (as our fan base is wont to do). If you acknowledge that he’s filling in right now but his place on the roster is playing 15-17 minutes on the bottom pair long term, you’re likely going to be more satisfied with who is, what he brings and how he performs long term. We consistently expect too much of players we place in roles that they likely aren’t destined for long term and then end up hating on them when they fail.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KirkAlbuquerque, TheWrongWay and SnowblindNYR
LokiDog said:
Well, like I said, I never mentioned his contract. I don’t even think his cap hit is going to be bad for a reliable bottom pairing guy with the way the cap is projected to rise. I’m fine with Borgen on the Rangers and not even upset with his contract. My post when he signed it was positive. I am only concerned with the role people expect him to fill. If you want him to play 18-20 minutes (long term, not this 16 game audition, but over the next several years) and be in the top four, I think you’re setting yourself up for disappointment and will in turn eventually treat Borgen as a whipping boy (as our fan base is wont to do). If you acknowledge that he’s filling in right now but his place on the roster is playing 15-17 minutes on the bottom pair long term, you’re likely going to be more satisfied with who is, what he brings and how he performs long term. We consistently expect too much of players we place in roles that they likely aren’t destined for long term and then end up hating on them when they fail.
Click to expand...

I don't know, I saw a Kraken fan say he was a top 4 there. Not that they're some dynaste or anything.
 
SnowblindNYR said:
I don't know, I saw a Kraken fan say he was a top 4 there. Not that they're some dynaste or anything.
Click to expand...

The most usage he ever had in Seattle he barely broke 17:30. Over his 3.5 year tenure he only was a regular in the lineup in 2 of those years and as a whole averaged around 16 minutes per game. He may have had a nice stretch of hockey. That’s what guys like him do. They are solid bottom pairing guys who occasionally have stretches where they perform a bit better. The league is literally filled with these guys; virtually every bottom pairing and bottom six in the NHL is full of guys who occasionally show flashes or can fill in somewhere higher in the lineup, but generally return back to their standard role. There’s nothing wrong with that. I’m sure that reliable bottom pairing D will soon be costing 3.5-4M against the cap with the projections anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ReddestRum and SnowblindNYR
LokiDog said:
I got killed for saying that when he had only been here for 10 games. I guess I interrupted the honey moon phase. Honestly, some posters found that opinion so offensive I think they wanted to ban me.
Click to expand...
I asked for you to be banned but the mods told me only 17 posters asked for you to be banned. They said they were not going to act until it reaches 20 posters. :D
 
  • Haha
Reactions: TheWrongWay and SnowblindNYR
The signing was so premature that Capwages even removed his trade clause to tell Drury to wait.

Puckpedia still has the clause listed from the signing. I'm going to assume there actually is a clause here.
 
TGWL said:
The signing was so premature that Capwages even removed his trade clause to tell Drury to wait.

Puckpedia still has the clause listed from the signing. I'm going to assume there actually is a clause here.
Click to expand...

Dude, it's Chris "Santa Clause" Drury.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TGWL
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom