You can't rebuild with Henrik on the roster. That's just impossible. If we want to rebuild the right way, then they all gotta go. Henrik is the only thing that has kept us out of that sweet spot at the top of the draft. He has made the team tank proof.
Prospect Info: Official 2014 NHL Draft Discussion, Suck for Sam or Play Bad For Ekblad?
- Thread starter I Eat Crow
- Start date
- Status
You can't rebuild with Henrik on the roster. That's just impossible. If we want to rebuild the right way, then they all gotta go. Henrik is the only thing that has kept us out of that sweet spot at the top of the draft. He has made the team tank proof.
It makes no sense to fully rebuild though. But that doesn't mean that we can't suck this season. We managed to get the #10 pick with Lundqvist, the way he plays so far this season, we can "top" that. Take the high pick, "retool" the roster, and we could be far stronger next a season.
It makes no sense? This team is a disaster. Enough with the retooling. Retooling is what they've been doing. Not working.
Ail
Based and Rangerspilled.
Doesn't matter if they tank to #30 next year, you know this team is not going to "win" the lottery. The rig will be on and McDavid will be going to some franchise about to tank in to oblivion to turn them around. Like the Devils.
Bad luck Rangers.
Bad luck Rangers.
NYRFANMANI
Department of Rempe Safety Management
We need high picks!
Ekblad and Draisaitl would be the dream scenario, and some more in 2015 ...
All of this is not happening though ... I don't see it happening in any way
Ekblad and Draisaitl would be the dream scenario, and some more in 2015 ...
All of this is not happening though ... I don't see it happening in any way
KreidertheGlider
MDZ for NYR Blueline
The #10 pick really isn't a rebuild....
From what I can see, we have to options to be successful.
1.) Go complete rebuild. Trade everyone except for Stepan, McDonagh, Del Zotto, Kreider, and Miller. Will take longest but will probably end up being the most successful.
2.) The Detroit model. Hire entirely new management, and draft correctly. Trade late 1sts for 2 early 2nds. Do research, and draft the Stepans and Bergerons of the draft.
What the NYR are doing right now is the worst possible thing. Can't get any high end talent, and don't win anything. Instead of replenishing the roster with young, homegrown draftees, they replace them with old vets on huge amounts of money.
From Dolan's perspective, NYR is successful. He makes tons of money on merchandise and NYR usually makes the playoffs so that's more revenue. He doesn't care if we win a cup, he just wants more money. Except for the buyouts, he couldn't be more happy. That's why, in my opinion, Sather hasn't been fired, it's because from an owner's viewpoint, Sather has been top- notched.
Ya because Edmonton has been so successful with their 85 first round picks over the last 4 years..
You guys act like a rebuild is a sure fire thing and there's a blue print that you just have to follow. There are at least as many attempts of a rebuild that got their teams nowhere than there are successful rebuilds. Everybody looks at the Penguins and Blackhawks and envies them for their team and thinks that a rebuild is the way to go. But teams like Edmonton, Tampa Bay, Florida, Columbus and the Islanders have all been rebuilding for years and yet the best they did was reaching the playoffs. The Rangers did far more in the last few years without countless top 5 picks.
But if we really rebuild completely, we give away Lundqvist, Nash, Callahan, Girardi and Staal at least (plus guys like Brassard and Stralman). We might finish really low, but even finishing last doesn't guarantee the #1 pick. And really, how high are the chances that even in the top 3 we can draft players that, at one time, will be better than what we give away? Sure, if we get McDavid and he's the real deal, that would probably work. But as for all the other top prospects for the next few years, if they will be as good as Lundqvist or Nash it'll be a big success.
A full rebuild is also a pretty long process, by the time our top picks are fully developed, our current young guys will already be near the end of their prime commanding top dollars, while our new players will get their big payday if they really reach their potential. Having lots of top young players is only half the work, assembling a supporting cast for a cup contender is just as hard.
I agree, that we have far too many plugs in our lineup, and that's why I suggest, for the lack of a better word, a retool. I know that word has been used for quite a few failed attempts, but that doesn't mean we have to blow it up completely to fix this.
If we keep Lundqvist, we have one of the very best in goal. Our defense is young and very deep, with at least a couple of good prospects in the pipeline. We have a star forward (that needs to be healthy of course) and good core players in Stepan, Callahan, Brassard or Hagelin. We also have a few prospects that are very close to the NHL (or already in it), who will at the very least provide good depth. Miller, Kreider, Fast, Hrivik, Lindberg, Kristo, that's two lines of probably NHL ready forwards, of whom at least some are destined to turn out as good players.
In the end our roster doesn't lack that much to be a contender. If we really mail in the season, we can get maybe get another top 6 forward in the draft. We could add one through free agency or a trade from a position of strength (defense).
What has to stop is the signing of too many useless plugs. It's okay to have one or two of those in your roster, but Pyatt, Pouliot, D. Moore, Powe along with Boyle, Dorsett is just too many players with not enough talent.
But if we really rebuild completely, we give away Lundqvist, Nash, Callahan, Girardi and Staal at least (plus guys like Brassard and Stralman). We might finish really low, but even finishing last doesn't guarantee the #1 pick. And really, how high are the chances that even in the top 3 we can draft players that, at one time, will be better than what we give away? Sure, if we get McDavid and he's the real deal, that would probably work. But as for all the other top prospects for the next few years, if they will be as good as Lundqvist or Nash it'll be a big success.
A full rebuild is also a pretty long process, by the time our top picks are fully developed, our current young guys will already be near the end of their prime commanding top dollars, while our new players will get their big payday if they really reach their potential. Having lots of top young players is only half the work, assembling a supporting cast for a cup contender is just as hard.
I agree, that we have far too many plugs in our lineup, and that's why I suggest, for the lack of a better word, a retool. I know that word has been used for quite a few failed attempts, but that doesn't mean we have to blow it up completely to fix this.
If we keep Lundqvist, we have one of the very best in goal. Our defense is young and very deep, with at least a couple of good prospects in the pipeline. We have a star forward (that needs to be healthy of course) and good core players in Stepan, Callahan, Brassard or Hagelin. We also have a few prospects that are very close to the NHL (or already in it), who will at the very least provide good depth. Miller, Kreider, Fast, Hrivik, Lindberg, Kristo, that's two lines of probably NHL ready forwards, of whom at least some are destined to turn out as good players.
In the end our roster doesn't lack that much to be a contender. If we really mail in the season, we can get maybe get another top 6 forward in the draft. We could add one through free agency or a trade from a position of strength (defense).
What has to stop is the signing of too many useless plugs. It's okay to have one or two of those in your roster, but Pyatt, Pouliot, D. Moore, Powe along with Boyle, Dorsett is just too many players with not enough talent.
Yes, it does. and that's the problem. Thinking we are one or two pieces away and then "retooling". It's not working. Overhaul time.
We are 18 months removed from a trip to the conference finals and we have played eight, admittedly mostly pathetic, games this season under a new coach and system. It's definitely not "sell all" time yet, not even if we finish bottom five. Do you really think we will get significantly better players than Lundqvist, Nash, Callahan and Staal in the next four drafts if we miss out on McDavid?
Ail
Based and Rangerspilled.
The Devils are 18 months removed from a trip to the cup finals and look where they are. That means nothing. These are the laurels we are resting on? You remember the path they took to get there? The absolute hardest, frustrating path. 18 months removed - who cares. We're 20 years removed from winning a cup, why don't you bring that up as an argument because it's just as valid.
You can't rebuild with those players on the roster, you just can't. It's either you go all in or you don't go at all. The half-assed "retools" aren't working.
Ail
Based and Rangerspilled.
Not to mention a lack of NHL caliber starting goalies. Among other things I am sure. Edmonton is an anomaly. I think most franchises with that many top5 picks would be competitive by now, at least enough to make the playoffs.
Everyone outside the playoffs got a shot at the #1 pick theoretically but the chance of actually win the lottery if you aren't a bottom feeder is very slim.
Ail
Based and Rangerspilled.
Did they change it? I thought the most any team could move up by winning the lottery was 4 spots?
People are so quick to say Edmonton but don't want to talk about Chicago or Pittsburgh. Those are the trademark tank to success stories out there.
But the Devils since have lost their top two (by a good margin) offensive threats, their franchise goalie is at the very end of his career and they generally have one of the older lineups. These things lead to a more or less automatic rebuild. Their GM was just stupid, so they don't have a 1st round pick this year and they can't start their rebuild yet.
Our situation is just completely different. If we can't keep Lundqvist, Staal and Callahan, then that would also be a pretty much automatic rebuild. Then I'd be absolutely on board with mailing in this and next season and trying to get a shot at McDavid. But keeping them is definitely prefered, as rebuilding is long and far from a sure thing. And for most rebuilds our current roster is the very best it gets. Pittsburgh and Chicago are the special cases, not the other way round.
The point is the same. Stop looking at what this team did 18 months ago - it's irrelevant. Now is what counts, not 18 months ago, not 12 months ago. That was two seasons past, live in the now.
There is no such thing as an automatic rebuild. Stop lying to yourself. That is a "retooling", which doesn't work. If rebuilding is long from a sure thing, what is what we have now? Because winning it all isn't happening any time soon with this crowd anyway. So you either commit to rebuilding, or you continue to put it off and then when you decide you want to rebuild, you realize you should have just done that in the first place.
You don't throw everything away because of eight mostly bad games under a new coach. You don't even throw everything you have away after one bad season, simply because it takes much longer to get it back.
Just show me how many "rebuilds" have resulted in better teams than what we have now (and with now I don't mean the eight games with a depleted lineup, but the team that regularly makes the playoffs and even got to the conference finals). I can easily name two, Chicago and Pittsburgh. And then?
- Status
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
To Advance Marseille @ Atalanta - 2nd leg. 1st leg result: 1-1Wagers: 1Staked: $50.00Event closes- Updated:
-
To Advance Olympiakos vs Aston Villa - 2nd leg. 1st leg result: Olympiakos 4-2Wagers: 1Staked: $50.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
GAME 1 - Drummondville Voltigeurs @ Baie Comeau DrakkarWagers: 2Staked: $190.00Event closes- Updated: