I am 6'3", and I certainly do not feel like I am taller than 91% of the population.
Player Discussion Alexandar Georgiev
- Thread starter SingnBluesOnBroadway
- Start date
I am 6'3", and I certainly do not feel like I am taller than 91% of the population.
Machinehead
GoAwayTrouba
Actually at 6'3", it's more like 98%.
I generally have about 30-35 male students per semester and I can count on one hand the ones that are my height or taller, so I don't know.
I guess you just never noticed it?
Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,354
Do you watch the NBA a lot?
Machinehead
GoAwayTrouba
Could be WWE. They just give everyone like 7 or 8 inches.
Actually at 6'3", it's more like 98%.
I generally have about 30-35 male students per semester and I can count on one hand the ones that are my height or taller, so I don't know.
I guess you just never noticed it?
Most of the people (males) I associate with, not including the people at work, are all about the same height. Most of the guys I've coached youth soccer with are all around the same height as me.
I'd even say the high school athletes I am around are all over 6'0" and most are at least 6'3".
My 11 year old daughter is 5'6", and she IS head and shoulders over everyone in 4th and 5th grade at school. A few 12 year olds she plays soccer with are around her height.
My wife is 5'1". Go figure.
Almost never.
I do watch a bit of college basketball and volunteer with high school...
Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,354
Seriously though, I think it's because when you see someone taller than you, it's more notable than when you see someone shorter than you. You'll remember it more, so your gut feeling about the height of the population compared to you will be disproportionately high.
Brooklyn Rangers Fan
Change is good.
Could be, though as someone who is 5'7", when I see other men that are shorter than me (particularly significantly shorter than me) it's just as jarring as seeing someone 6'4" or whatever. It's probably all relative, to some degree.
YoSoyLalo
me reading HF
Absolute stud.
Gonna make the choice between him and Shestyorkin a tough one.
Gonna make the choice between him and Shestyorkin a tough one.
Mac n Gs
Gorton plz
- Jan 17, 2014
- 22,587
- 12,849
I hope they're smart with how they navigate this situation so that they put themselves in a position where they can utilize both of them. Imagine rolling a goalie tandem of Georgie and Shesty in a couple of years?
eco's bones
Registered User
That's what I'm thinking. If the Rangers do decide to move him they better get at least a 1st rounder for him and not a tail end of the first round. There's no reason to think he's not going to be a really good starting goalie. But I'd be happy to have him and Shesterkin sharing the Rangers goaltending duties if not this year then next year. Henrik's a HOF'er but they're the future.
Mac n Gs
Gorton plz
- Jan 17, 2014
- 22,587
- 12,849
Exactly, and as long as they can transition this in a way that's respectful to Hank, I don't think there will be any problems.
Georgiev is up for a new contract this summer, and I hope they reward him with a long-term deal at a reasonable AAV. I think getting him in the 4 year, $2M range would be a fair deal for both parties based on what goalies have been getting recently. The only issue is it doesn't line up with Shesty's ELC, so they're missing out on a really strong tandem at a really low cost.
offdacrossbar
misfit fanboy
seems weird to have his much NHL ready, or nearly ready, talent. good problem to have. somethings gotta give. we just have to make a decision.
ADA and fox.
georgie and shesty.
chad and howden
staal and
ADA and fox.
georgie and shesty.
chad and howden
staal and
Irishguy42
Mr. Preachy
YoSoyLalo
me reading HF
I'm 5'4 and have given up finding anyone not Asian, Hispanic, or female that is shorter than me.
Yeah if he continues playing the way he has played basically since being promoted to the NHL, it's hard to justify trading him. I know Shesterkin is a great prospect, but still. Georgiev looks phenomenal and he's doing it in the NHL. It's not like with Talbot where we had to move him because Lundqvist had many years left ahead of him.
I'm a huge Lundqvist fan but Georgiev needs the majority of the remaining starts. Maybe Hank will feel compelled to retire. I know he has a lot of money on the table, but who knows. He's owed $5.5M for next year; maybe he can go back to Sweden and make up $2M of that or so. Hank strikes me as the type to realize his time has passed and not stand in the way of progress.
They show Hank on the bench during Georgiev's starts and his look is almost like, "I know."
I'm a huge Lundqvist fan but Georgiev needs the majority of the remaining starts. Maybe Hank will feel compelled to retire. I know he has a lot of money on the table, but who knows. He's owed $5.5M for next year; maybe he can go back to Sweden and make up $2M of that or so. Hank strikes me as the type to realize his time has passed and not stand in the way of progress.
They show Hank on the bench during Georgiev's starts and his look is almost like, "I know."
Last edited:
Priorae
Registered User
The rangers should keep hank, Georgie, Igor...all of them.
having all of these options isn’t a problem we have to fix.
having all of these options isn’t a problem we have to fix.
So no one thinks Hank may waive at the deadline ?
Perfect world is Georgie, Shestyorkin w Huska in the A for next year
Perfect world is Georgie, Shestyorkin w Huska in the A for next year
Eventually Shesterkin will really need NHL starts. And with Georgiev playing like he has, the proposed "solution" of sending him down for periods so Shesterkin can come up becomes unjustifiable. So then it becomes problematic.
I mean Georgiev is making a case for being the #1 now and moving forward, regardless of Shesterkin's past successes.
