Toggle sidebar

Player Discussion Tony DeAngelo: Part IV

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
TheBloodyNine said:
Whether he is "unproven" or not is irrelevant. If that was the case then top prospects would be traded all the time. They aren't.
Click to expand...
Whether he is proven or unproven matters in what you are getting in trade value. Just what is it that you think that you can trade him for right now?
You'd probably have traded Shesterkin because he was an unproven prospect who was not in NA for 5 years though, right?
Click to expand...
This is about as relevant as the color of the water bottles that the Rangers use.
 
so Tony D is doing too good he pretty much has to get resigned then maybe start Lundqvist in the AHL whenever he comes up..........Keane can be the call up on RD if anyone gets hurt.
 
True Blue said:
Wait, let me get this straight. I am making arbitrary remarks about a player's projected point total who is actually here and you are making definitive statements about there being a glut at RHD....and using players how are either in Hartford or Sweden to accent your point? How is your point on more solid ground?

Have Keane or Lundqvist actually played in the NHL? Have they showed the same acumen as DeAngelo has at this level?

Did you see that tape to tape pass that Shesterkin made last night? We should try him at wing for a few games. Just to see what it looks like. There's no risk...
Click to expand...
Their names are Trouba and Fox. [mod]:banghead:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: TheBloodyNine
True Blue said:
Whether he is proven or unproven matters in what you are getting in trade value. Just what is it that you think that you can trade him for right now?

This is about as relevant as the color of the water bottles that the Rangers use.
Click to expand...
It's "not relevant" to you because it proves you completely wrong. Shesterkin was in the same exact situation that Lundkqivst is currently in according to you. What would his value have been? Would it have been ok to trade him because we had Georgiev here?

Lundkqvist has proven himself a top NHL prospect this season. He would have to be part of a package for a significant player if the Rangers were going to trade him.
 
NYR Viper said:
We often see players who struggle a bit to go from wing to center or the other way. Taking a defenseman and asking him to play forward, to me, is not a good route to take.

Also, a 60 point d-man is worth WAY more than a 60 point winger. Why move him?
Click to expand...
If we were contemplating trading him I would experiment with him at C instead of letting him go for a possible fraction of his future value . What skill sets would he lack to accomplish the task ? The kid can do it all and at a high rate of speed and precision . We don't have a long list of C's in this organization that can bring what he already has for assets like his abrasiveness for starters ...imagine him with Lemieux ? Everybody says draft a C ...well , that takes a lot of time to pay off . It would be an interesting experiment to watch for a few choice games especially when the club is likely out of the playoff pic .
 
TheBloodyNine said:
It's "not relevant" to you because it proves you completely wrong. Shesterkin was in the same exact situation that Lundkqivst is currently in according to you. What would his value have been?
Click to expand...
It is not relevant because it is not important. What he would or would have fetched is completely hypothetical. That said one thing is for sure. His value prior to his stellar play in the AHL was significantly lower than it is post the AHL.
Would it have been ok to trade him because we had Georgiev here?
Click to expand...
1) I was not looking to trade him so you would need to ask someone that was

2) Depending on the return, everyone can be traded.
Lundkqvist has proven himself a top NHL prospect this season. He would have to be part of a package for a significant player if the Rangers were going to trade him.
Click to expand...
Like what?
 
B17 Apricots said:
Their names are Trouba and Fox. [mod]:banghead:
Click to expand...
What do Fox and Trouba have to do with anything when you are bringing up Keane and Lundqvist? Or have I just started to conflate two equally moronic narratives?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I would really caution those who are penciling Keane into the lineup, even just as a fill-in. I don't think he's ready now, and when he is ready, I'm not sure how good he's going to be. JMO, of course.
 
B17 Apricots said:
Or just read what I originally wrote ya clown
Click to expand...
Theres already a surplus at RHD and you got Lundkvist and Keane in the pipeline.

That is what you wrote, no?

surplus: an excess of production or supply over demand.

Where is excess of production? As a matter of fact, where are the excess bodies?
 
  • Like
Reactions: B17 Apricots
leetch99 said:
And Buff has Cup ring for doing so and Burns some gold medals....does not seem like it hurt them any . I don't see much downside to an experiment . Think he makes a better C than a winger though.
Click to expand...

Those guys both played forward for most if not their entire lives prior to turning pro.
 
A little bit of perspective from a side conversation I am having in PMs, and then I am peacing out to review an annual report for a client:

ADA is on pace for 16 goals and 61 points. If he maintains his current pace, it would be the most points since Leetch in 2001. In other words, the most points by a Rangers defenseman since ADA was in kindergarten.

And while going off projected stats is always a risky proposition, in his last 78 games, going back to January 2019, ADA has posted 10 goals and 52 points. That production would still only be topped by the aforementioned Leetch 18 years ago --- when some of our recent draft picks were in the womb.

I'm interested in finding him shutdown partner, not converting him into a wing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Harbour Dog, ecemleafs, TheBPA and 4 others
They get extremely favorable usage, but so does most of the other pairings in this top-10. We should ramp up their usage in more situations and see how they fare.
upload_2020-1-8_23-15-2.png


Bite the bullet and use a top-4 of Skjei-Trouba, DeAngelo-Fox and use the third pairing of Staal-Lindgren/Smith sparingly. See how it goes.

Most of our other pairings are in the 200's and 300's.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Buchnevich89 and TheBPA
bbny said:
You still can. It'll cost 2-3 extra million per but so what? He'll be happier and more content than being underpaid long term, and the Rangers will feel more confident about him moving forward.
Click to expand...
I'd have given him 5x8 if he woulda taken it. Now it'll be 6or 7x8 for a guy with his talent.
 
Inferno said:
I'd have given him 5x8 if he woulda taken it. Now it'll be 6or 7x8 for a guy with his talent.
Click to expand...

I guess my point is I don't think he'd be very happy putting up 65-70 points getting paid only 5 million. He earned more than that and the Rangers should happily pay it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom