Proposal: Roster Building Thread Part IV: High Hopes

[BobMarleyNYR]

Nedved didn't score no 75 points in his last stint and Nylander did it once with a prime Jagr on his wing.

Neither of them were a true #1 Center especially compared to the other Centers in the league at the time...#99, #11 and #88 to name a few

Lemieux, Lafontaine, Modano, Yzerman, Fedorov, Francis, Gilmour, Nieuwendyk, Roenick, Sakic, Forsberg, Weight, Oates, Turgeon, Yashin, Andreychuk...

Nedved was what we'd now call a 1B center... Nylander WAAS a 2A but the little lull before the '03 guyxs got big made him a 1B.

 

[NYR]

Lemieux, Lafontaine, Modano, Yzerman, Fedorov, Francis, Gilmour, Nieuwendyk, Roenick, Sakic, Forsberg, Weight, Oates, Turgeon, Yashin, Andreychuk...

Nedved was what we'd now call a 1B center... Nylander WAAS a 2A but the little lull before the '03 guyxs got big made him a 1B.

1B's?

It certainly wasn't from lack of trying but Nedved got his ass handed to him by nearly ever single one of the above names.

Nylander while talented heavily benefited due to the Jagr factor.

Both were playing way out of their comfort/skill level much like you're going to witness this season.

 

[Machinehead]

Nedved didn't score no 75 points in his last stint and Nylander did it once with a prime Jagr on his wing.

Neither of them were a true #1 Center especially compared to the other Centers in the league at the time...#99, #11 and #88 to name a few

Nedved had 78 points in 00-01.

Nylander was Washington's 1C for a couple of years after he left us (before Backstrom broke out) so it's disingenuous to say it was because of Jagr.

Oh and BTW, we had #88 who was very clearly still a 1C when he was here.

The first line was literally never a problem for the Rangers during the Dark Ages. The Czech Line, the FLY line, and the Czech Line 2.0 were all top 3-5 lines in the entire league. It was everything besides the first line that was a problem.

 

[Machinehead]

That same year, Yzerman got hurt but paced for right around 78.

Only seven centers had more points than Nedved.

 

[NYR]

Nedved had 78 points in 00-01.

Nylander was Washington's 1C for a couple of years after he left us (before Backstrom broke out) so it's disingenuous to say it was because of Jagr.

Oh and BTW, we had #88 who was very clearly still a 1C when he was here.

The first line was literally never a problem for the Rangers during the Dark Ages. The Czech Line, the FLY line, and the Czech Line 2.0 were all top 3-5 lines in the entire league. It was everything besides the first line that was a problem.

Dude..Since you probably weren't old enough to actually see any of these guys play how about we just address what I posted?

Are you comfortable with Zib and Hayes as our #1 and #2 centers?

No concern with the depth? Injuries?

 

[Tawnos]

Dude..Since you probably weren't old enough to actually see any of these guys play how about we just address what I posted?

Are you comfortable with Zib and Hayes as our #1 and #2 centers?

No concern with the depth? Injuries?

He's not wrong.

I'm not comfortable with last year's Zibanejad and Hayes as our 1/2. Growth is the goal, though, so last year's Zib and Hayes are hopefully a starting point.

 

[NYR]

He's not wrong.

I'm not comfortable with last year's Zibanejad and Hayes as our 1/2. Growth is the goal, though, so last year's Zib and Hayes are hopefully a starting point.

I'm not looking to get into the whole Nedved/Nylander thing but at the time they were like comparing Zib to McDavid in today's game, to the elite centers of the league back then.

The NYR weren't winning anything with them.

 

[Irishguy42]

Massively understating how much of an impact having Shattenkirk over Girardi will have on the team. That minimizes the loss of Stepan.

 

[NYR]

Massively understating how much of an impact having Shattenkirk over Girardi will have on the team. That minimizes the loss of Stepan.

I think you're massively overstating his impact. I'm not hating on him and he's a necessity in today's game but I'm thinking Yandle 2.0.

Losing Stepan is huge. No way Shattenkirk changes that in any way IMO.

 

[BobMarleyNYR]

I was just listing guys who were better. But Nedved was a 1B whether you like it or not... you could argue the same for Nylander... as for 2017-18, if Zibanejad and Hayes play up to their potential, it could be like Bergeron-Krejci in 2012.

 

[Raspewtin]

Losing Stepan and not replacing him blows but this is the best defense this team has had (ON PAPER) in over 20 years.

That is not a small movement, that's extremely significant.

 

[NYR]

I was just listing guys who were better. But Nedved was a 1B whether you like it or not... you could argue the same for Nylander... as for 2017-18, if Zibanejad and Hayes play up to their potential, it could be like Bergeron-Krejci in 2012.

That is a tall order but I appreciate your optimism

 

[NYR]

Losing Stepan and not replacing him blows but this is the best defense this team has had (ON PAPER) in over 20 years.

That is not a small movement, that's extremely significant.

They don't even have a definitive 3rd pairing right now.

McD is McD, Smith is Smith

Love Skjei

Is Shattenkirk gonna even stick on the top pair?

Losing Stepan only compounds the amount pucks that are going to be coming the other way.

It's just not a complete team right now IMO

 

[NYR]

I was just listing guys who were better. But Nedved was a 1B whether you like it or not... you could argue the same for Nylander... as for 2017-18, if Zibanejad and Hayes play up to their potential, it could be like Bergeron-Krejci in 2012.

PS..There is no 1B in hockey. The correct label would be a #2

 

[LORDE]

Probably should let Kirk play A game before we say he'll more than replace Step

 

[Irishguy42]

Probably should let Kirk play A game before we say he'll more than replace Step

Same goes for how profound of an impact losing Stepan will be.

Goes both ways.

 

[NoQuitInNewMexico]

Next season matters, of course, but what kind of number is Nash looking at for his next contract? Is there newspaper chatter about him "loving life as a Ranger" or however they phrase it? That Marleau contract makes me think we don't have a chance.

He's not worth $8m, he's easy to complain about, the difference between this deal and his next deal will all get eaten up by guys on the books getting raises, but we're worse off without him.

 

[TheDirtyH]

Completely disagree.

Who would you rather have? A Crosby, McDavid or Karlsson?

Having a #1 Center is paramount.

If I'm being honest, I'd take Karlsson over anyone but McDavid.

Moreover, Stepan's time here as represented on this board could be summed up with the thread title:
Rangers still need a true 1C.

I'm not worried about the wingers.

I'm worried about the centers. They're the key defensive FWD on their respective lines. Neither on which Zib or Hayes know anything about.

Then why should they be the key defensive players? And why shouldn't they be able to learn and develop a more complete game? And wouldn't the immense improvements *on defense* be the best possible support for said players to grow that part of their game with?

 

[Mac n Gs]

Same goes for how profound of an impact losing Stepan will be.

Goes both ways.

I think Shattenkirk's effects are more easy to discern considering he's directly replacing someone like Girardi. Step's effects will take a while to figure out because it's reliant on growth from so many players being able to pick up his slick. Long-term I think we'll be fine and maybe even better off, but for the time being, this place will be a gong show by November

 

[NYR]

Next season matters, of course, but what kind of number is Nash looking at for his next contract? Is there newspaper chatter about him "loving life as a Ranger" or however they phrase it? That Marleau contract makes me think we don't have a chance.

He's not worth $8m, he's easy to complain about, the difference between this deal and his next deal will all get eaten up by guys on the books getting raises, but we're worse off without him.

Much like you and everyone else, I doubt JG has an actual answer to that question but if you go by his history, he'll either trade him for younger players or just lose him for nothing..

 

[smoneil]

You lose a 50 point center and add a 50 point defenseman. The latter is much more valuable and much more difficult to replace/pretend you have.

I'm not convinced that we HAVE a "50 point defenseman" is Shatt. He had 56 points last season, but last season was the first time he scored more than 45.

 

[smoneil]

Dude..Since you probably weren't old enough to actually see any of these guys play how about we just address what I posted?

Are you comfortable with Zib and Hayes as our #1 and #2 centers?

No concern with the depth? Injuries?

I'm older than dirt. Nylander was a 1C here. I think you have a point about Nedved (the Czech line would have been a very good 2nd line on a contender), but Straka/Nylander/Jagr was all about chemistry, not about one guy lifting up the other two. We saw proof of that when Gomez looked like crap centering Jagr and Dubinsky had to step in.

 

[NYR]

If I'm being honest, I'd take Karlsson over anyone but McDavid.

Moreover, Stepan's time here as represented on this board could be summed up with the thread title:
Rangers still need a true 1C.




Then why should they be the key defensive players? And why shouldn't they be able to learn and develop a more complete game? And wouldn't the immense improvements *on defense* be the best possible support for said players to grow that part of their game with?

That just goes with the position.

Centers have the bulk of the defensive responsibly.

A player can always learn I suppose but it just comes naturally to Stepan and he was elite at that aspect of his game.

Asking Zib and Hayes to take on that responsibility is nothing short of idiotic.

It takes a huge amount pressure off of the the defence when you're able to execute that as well as Stepan.

He's shut down every elite center in the league and he's only 27.

Such a stupid move by JG.

Seriously!

 

[smoneil]

Massively understating how much of an impact having Shattenkirk over Girardi will have on the team. That minimizes the loss of Stepan.

I think you're massively overstating his impact. I'm not hating on him and he's a necessity in today's game but I'm thinking Yandle 2.0.

Losing Stepan is huge. No way Shattenkirk changes that in any way IMO.

I think it's a little of both. I think our offense will be MUCH better and there will be fewer "wtf was the d-man thinking on that play" moments. At the same time, I think we will see a dip in possession and an uptick in odd man rushes. We brought in a d-man not known for his shut-down skill and gave up a center who took a lot of defensive pressure off the rest of the lineup.

This season is literally ALL going to come down to how Zib, Hayes and Miller play. They not only need to progress, but they need to progress a LOT, because their minutes are going to be tougher than they have been thus far without Stepan here.

This team is also one injured C away from being screwed. They literally only have three proven NHL centers on the roster right now (Zib, Hayes, DD). And nobody in Hartford is really knocking down the door.

 

[BobMarleyNYR]

PS..There is no 1B in hockey. The correct label would be a #2

Especially true in the 90's... you were either a star or not... for what it's worth, I got used to reading the "1A/1B" crap, and it's stuck with me... I always snicker when people talk about the "best fourth line center" and stuff. But I too have done it. It almost makes sense...

I'm waiting for the Rangers to bring in there first natural 36DD...