I don’t like him as a player at all for us. If he’s in our top 4 long term we’re in trouble.
Player Discussion Tony DeAngelo - Part II
- Thread starter Krams
- Start date
- Status
I don’t like him as a player at all for us. If he’s in our top 4 long term we’re in trouble.
Why the need to denigrate Pionk in an attempt to glorify DeAngelo?
The win against the Bruins was impressive, but bragging the previous two? Do you really think that the Rangers would have lost to either the 'Canes or 'Hawks if Deangelo was out and Pionk was in?
offdacrossbar
misfit fanboy
not sure what you are reading
44 isnt good.
44 isnt missed.
44 is overplayed by his buddy
44 and his PP1 time is a joke
not one word about 77
Vinny DeAngelo
Jimmy Easy to defend
I tend to agree with @True Blue on this one...not sure what you are reading
44 isnt good.
44 isnt missed.
44 is overplayed by his buddy
44 and his PP1 time is a joke
not one word about 77
Yes you can bash Pionk all you want but doing it in the DeAngelo thread makes it appear like you are making those arguments in contrast to Tony.
One doesn't have to suck for the other to be good. If you wish to talk Pionk theres a thread for that. If you wish to talk Tony DeAngelo this is the thread to do it in.
offdacrossbar
misfit fanboy
mine was a follow up to @Mikos87's take a bit further back where he was contrasting the 2 players.
you're entitled to say what you want. its cool. its wrong, but hey, whatever.
44 is brutal. his 5v5 numbers are abysmal. hes over done and over played.
but i cant say that here in the "77" thread.
oops. i just did....
Vinny DeAngelo
Jimmy Easy to defend
I'm not disagreeing with you, I just dont think this is the place for that conversation..mine was a follow up to @Mikos87's take a bit further back where he was contrasting the 2 players.
you're entitled to say what you want. its cool. its wrong, but hey, whatever.
44 is brutal. his 5v5 numbers are abysmal. hes over done and over played.
but i cant say that here in the "77" thread.
Harbour Dog
Registered User
The conversation doesn't have to be about Pionk vs. ADA at all, but when you put it in a question like that... yes, I think there would of been a better than 50% chance of us losing one of those games.
will1066
If you score four, you better f'n win the game
- Oct 12, 2008
- 52,563
- 75,856
Inferno
Registered User
I like pionk as a 3rd pairing defenseman. I don't see the issue. His problem isnt him..it's his usage.
I think he could get better and that playing more appropriate minutes and not trying to be a do everything defender could make him more effective
JimmyG89
Registered User
- May 1, 2010
- 10,149
- 9,033
It's a place for the conversation when 44 is clearly taking 77s ice time. He shouldn't be doing that.
Maybe 77 should have been doing what was communicated to him as necessary and this discussion would not be happening.
Rempe73
RIP King of Pop
Or 77 and 44 should both play, while the older guys should sit.
Or that. Just seems to me that if 77 had been doing what was told to him he would have to do, then he would have been playing all along.
Gardner McKay
RIP, Jimmy.
I like when we keep the thread on the correct topic... Anthony DeAngelo.
That sticky post on top of the thread needs to change to the Rangers record with Tony in the line-up versus out of the line up.
offdacrossbar
misfit fanboy
the larry brooks article today perfectly details the problem with ADA.
kids done pretty much everything he needs to do to stay in the lineup. the metrics confirm the eye test. hes played very well along side marc staal and hes been feisty and self controlled. not much to argue with. hes earned his continued playing time.
and still he may sit.
meanwhile, 44- who's metrics suck, seems to have some entitlement to this spot regardless of the numbers or the eye test. on most nights, the numbers say hes just not that good- certainly 5v5 and when hes not helping on the PP and being spoon fed minutes, hes proven to be more of a liability than anything else.
play ADA. kids proven himself and he should be a fixture in next years top 6
kids done pretty much everything he needs to do to stay in the lineup. the metrics confirm the eye test. hes played very well along side marc staal and hes been feisty and self controlled. not much to argue with. hes earned his continued playing time.
and still he may sit.
meanwhile, 44- who's metrics suck, seems to have some entitlement to this spot regardless of the numbers or the eye test. on most nights, the numbers say hes just not that good- certainly 5v5 and when hes not helping on the PP and being spoon fed minutes, hes proven to be more of a liability than anything else.
play ADA. kids proven himself and he should be a fixture in next years top 6
- Jul 20, 2005
- 4,926
- 2,340
I don't think in all the years of player and prospect discussion on this board I have ever seen this argument used so much without any idea what it means.
Once again, when Quinn chooses to confide in me, you will be the first to know the answer.
The Crypto Guy
Registered User
- Jun 26, 2017
- 29,232
- 38,920
The Brook article did state that ADA has done what he needs to do since being back in the line up. Had nothing to do with entire season.
What does Pionk have to do with this? Why not pile on Shattenkirk? Or Staal? Why have you seemed to have singled out Pionk as the great reason that ADA may sit?
What ADA has done is proven that he can do what is demanded of him and that has borne fruit in that he has played very well. If he continues to do just that, he should continue to play.
NYRFANMANI
Department of Rempe Safety Management
Some people act as if we got Scotty Bowman after Scotty Bowman up in here coaching.
I have yet to see anyone act that way. What was stated is that something was going on that Quinn has addressed several times with ADA. Quinn's speaking confirmed that yes they did speak about whatever it is. That is hardly comparing him to Bowman.
The Crypto Guy
Registered User
- Jun 26, 2017
- 29,232
- 38,920
- Status
