I think Jones has a pretty good shot at being somewhere in the bottom 4 given his able to QB the 2nd PP
LD Zac Jones - UMass (Amherst), NCAA (2019, 68th, NYR)
- Thread starter Frk It
- Start date
Pavel Buchnevich
Drury and Laviolette Must Go
Pavel Buchnevich
Drury and Laviolette Must Go
Pavel Buchnevich
Drury and Laviolette Must Go
AmericanDream
Thank you Elon!
He is going to be a f***ing stud. The end.
I think he's going to be our best offensive LD, even better than Miller and will likely be a mainstay on the PP. Possibly even pairing with Fox on PP1 or Lundqvist (eventually) on PP2. Book it. And I even think Jones will be above average defensively. His size is the only plausible "issue" in that their only size on D comes from Miller and Trouba. But I don't think that will be a huge issue honestly as Fox is great defensively, Lindgren even though just 6' is a fantastic defensive D and Jones I think will be above average.
I love Miller. But Jones just seems the superior offensive player atm. Or at least, like he will be. I am just not sure where he will end up in 5x5. Probably 3rd line though behind Miller and Lindgren. Maybe paired with Trouba? Or I guess Lundqvist a possibility there also. And Schneider eventually replacing Trouba. Unless the Rangers do make some huge trade and move one of these pieces. Otherwise, I think they'll end up trading Robertson, Reunanen, Rykov. Ragnarsson etc.. The Rangers really love their "R" D prospects it seems. Right now, size is really the only edge I would give to Robertson over Jones.
Something like:
Lindgren - Fox
Miller - Trouba
Jones - Lundqvist
Or swap Lindgren and Miller and swap Trouba with Lundqvist. And then Lindgren, Fox, Miller, Trouba on the PK I would guess.
Last edited:
Don't get caught up in Paring 1, pairing 2, pp1, pp2, etc. All about chemistry. 5 years from now, for argument sake, let's say their top 6 is that with someone like Robertson, Schneider, whoever replacing Trouba. Jones may very well be better than Lindgren and Miller. But, if Lindgren still has the chemistry with Fox and Miller has it with Trouba's replacement and Jones with Lundqvist, it really doesn't matter who is labeled 1st line 2nd line, etc.
Fair enough. In regard to pairing. In regard to overall talent though, and hopefully eventual chemistry, I do think Robertson is the odd man out to Miller, Lindgren and Jones in whatever order and pairing they end up in. But yea, a trade can also alter this very quickly. And Robertson is really the only guy, not so much Reunanen etc.., that I think could realistically push any of Jones, Lindgren or Miller. At least in terms of overall talent and traits. With Schneider pushing our RD's.
It's an odd situation. They might need some more experience on the D, but that will come with time if they are patient. If they could shed Troubas contract somehow ,I wouldn't necessarily be opposed. But right now, he's their main heavily experienced D.
Pavel Buchnevich
Drury and Laviolette Must Go
Rangers fans always talk about trading this guy. It doesn’t make any sense.
First, Jones is the only young left handed defensemen the Rangers have with any type of significant offensive tilt to how he plays. While I don’t think Lindgren, Miller, Robertson are players who are devoid of offense, Jones is the only real PP type among them. Of the four, he’s the least similar to the other three.
Second, Rangers fans have decided that Fox and Lundkvist make Jones expendable, even though he plays a different side than they do. The Rangers also apparently aren’t allowed to have three defensemen under 6’0, even though all are average or better defensively, including Fox who is one of the league’s elite defensive players. Rangers fans have went too far with this toughness narrative. If Jones is better than the other options, you keep him over other options. Size should be irrelevant.
Lastly, apparently Lundkvist and Schneider can’t be traded because they were first round picks. Miller for similar reasons. Robertson was also drafted a round higher than Jones. I’m not suggesting any of those players should be traded. Who is eventually traded is a tough decision, but for some it’s apparently an easy decision that Jones will go.
First, Jones is the only young left handed defensemen the Rangers have with any type of significant offensive tilt to how he plays. While I don’t think Lindgren, Miller, Robertson are players who are devoid of offense, Jones is the only real PP type among them. Of the four, he’s the least similar to the other three.
Second, Rangers fans have decided that Fox and Lundkvist make Jones expendable, even though he plays a different side than they do. The Rangers also apparently aren’t allowed to have three defensemen under 6’0, even though all are average or better defensively, including Fox who is one of the league’s elite defensive players. Rangers fans have went too far with this toughness narrative. If Jones is better than the other options, you keep him over other options. Size should be irrelevant.
Lastly, apparently Lundkvist and Schneider can’t be traded because they were first round picks. Miller for similar reasons. Robertson was also drafted a round higher than Jones. I’m not suggesting any of those players should be traded. Who is eventually traded is a tough decision, but for some it’s apparently an easy decision that Jones will go.
Jones has so much upside and is in an ideal scenario development wise - I really hope we don’t trade him.
I don’t understand the talk of trading him because we are stacked at D. Letting him get more seasoning in the AHL is absolutely ideal from a developmental perspective.
If he is clearly above the AHL to the extent that he isn’t improving and developing bad habits (this would be very unlikely IMO) then 1) we know more about what we have, 2) Jones has more value, and 3) he’s a better player and can more easily step into our lineup and we can reevaluate what to do then.
We have the deepest prospect pool/young D in the league. I’d hate to see us mess things up.
There will be a time when we may move some of our better youngsters but now isn’t the time to trade away Jones or any of our blue chip prospects, unless we somehow can buy low on a top line player.
I don’t understand the talk of trading him because we are stacked at D. Letting him get more seasoning in the AHL is absolutely ideal from a developmental perspective.
If he is clearly above the AHL to the extent that he isn’t improving and developing bad habits (this would be very unlikely IMO) then 1) we know more about what we have, 2) Jones has more value, and 3) he’s a better player and can more easily step into our lineup and we can reevaluate what to do then.
We have the deepest prospect pool/young D in the league. I’d hate to see us mess things up.
There will be a time when we may move some of our better youngsters but now isn’t the time to trade away Jones or any of our blue chip prospects, unless we somehow can buy low on a top line player.
Last edited:
Amazing Kreiderman
Registered User
- Apr 11, 2011
- 44,879
- 40,423
The main argument against Jones is because people are convinced you cannot have more than 2 "small defensemen". I think skill and talent far outweighs how tall a player is, but maybe that's just me.
When it comes to the ranking of our young D-men, I have Jones 3rd behind Lundkvist and Schneider, but ahead of Miller, Robertson, Reunanen and Skinner (in that order). If they trade him, I won't be upset but he would not be my first choice to include in a trade. Jones brings something that's essential in the NHL today. And this notion that you need "big defensemen" when we just saw Tampa Bay winning back to back cups with sub-6 ft forwards in Point, Kucherov, Colton, Palát, Coleman, Gourde and Johnson. Why do you need 6'5" defensemen to stop them?
You need defensemen who can keep up with those players, because they run circles around guys like McNabb, Weber etc.
- Jan 17, 2018
- 3,811
- 8,577
Read the recent comments because I like Jones and think he is going to be a productive 2nd pairing player fairly soon.
That said, the above comment caught my eye. Small, quick, forwards can be the core of a great team--Tampa. However, they also had a solid D-corp. The size of their 6 main D-men in the playoffs (6'6"/223, 6'3"/215, 6'1"/215, 6'3/233, 6'2"/233, 6'3/200).
Hard to make an argument for small D-men using Tampa's success.
Amazing Kreiderman
Registered User
- Apr 11, 2011
- 44,879
- 40,423
Correlation does not equal causation.
Tampa did not win because Hedman, Sergachev, McDonagh etc are over 6'3". Tampa won, because those defenseman are, wait for it... good at playing defense.
I take Fox or Makar over McNabb any day. Size should never be a factor. At most, it should be a tie-breaker when choosing between defensemen. But Jones has the talent to be better than other options the Rangers have. To brush him aside for someone taller, who is worse at defense, is how you miss out on a Cup.
Yup. 100%.
I think it's fair to say that if the Rangers had 4x clones of Lindgren and 4x clones of Fox as their defenders, that team could go pretty far. Lindgren only 6', Fox 5'11.
We could actually have 3X versions of Fox (broadly speaking) if we keep Jones around and Lundvist becomes what he should. Would be nice to have a Fox type player, on the left hand side too, ie Jones. Even if he's just Fox light or something.
100% agree. That's where I have Jones ranked among our D's too. And the only reason Schneider is ahead of him is because he's a completely different type of player, who can be to defense what Lundvist and Jones are to offense. The type of player you need 1 or 2 of on a team. But you don't necessarily need 3-4 Schneiders.
Check out the rosters of 2017 Pens and Nashville, both cup finalists.
2016 Pens Cup winners.
2011-12 Kings cup winners.
2009-12 Hawks cup winners.
2018 cup winning Caps team also.
Not exactly TB like.
Bruins (2018-19 onward) similarly haven't had a huge D outside of Chara and couple others. They contend regularly.
So at least 5 cup winning teams in last 11 years or so, and 7 (5 of which were the cup winners) finalists and that's without going over other playoffs teams/conference finalists over that period.
Last edited:
- Jan 17, 2018
- 3,811
- 8,577
I think
Again, I am not saying size is what made the Pens D successful, just that you can't use them in support of the point that smaller D is successful.
I think people were missing my point. It wasn't that defense needs to be big--as I said I am a fan of Zac Jones. The point was that using Tampa didn't support the argument. The 2017 Stanley Cup champions don't either. According to the roster, the four leading TOI d-men for the Pens were Dumoulin (6'4"/207), Hainsey (6'3"/205), Maatta (6'2"/210), and Schultz (6'2"/193).
Again, I am not saying size is what made the Pens D successful, just that you can't use them in support of the point that smaller D is successful.
2017 Pens TOI, was that specifically in the finals or all season? Im using total season atm but it looks like Daley (5'11) and Letang (6') were the 4/5th in toi for the season. And Cole was #1 and he's just 6'1 which isn't huge. Which would be 3 of the top 5 D in TOI 6'1 or less. Unless I am reading this wrong. And Letang was #1 in ATOI
I get your point though.
Pavel Buchnevich
Drury and Laviolette Must Go
If I'm a team with deep young forwards that needs some d I'm calling about Jones. He definitely looks NHL ready.
TheGreenTBer
shut off the power while I take a big shit
- Apr 30, 2021
- 9,432
- 11,224
The Jets saw the first name "Zac" and immediately started wondering how they could ruin two Zacs for the price of one.
Matz03
Registered User
Captain Clutch
Registered User
- May 2, 2012
- 523
- 246
Lots of reasons: Fox, Miller, Lindgren, Trouba, Lundkvist, Schneider, Robertson.....
It's possible they would trade Lundkvist instead and it doesn't have to happen anytime soon but you have to figure they trade one of the two of them for sure, you just can't expect to roster a team full of undersized puck movers at defense.
My guess at the Rangers D in a couple of years.
1st Line: Fox & Lindgren
2nd Line: Lundkvist & Miller
3rd Line: Schneider & Robertson
As mentioned above, Jones could be flipped for a very nice asset(s) at forward. Not enough room (or money) for them all.
Pavel Buchnevich
Drury and Laviolette Must Go
With all due respect to @Captain Clutch, that mindset is the problem. You can't try to create a narrative of a defense is too small, and then include the Norris winner as part of that example. He has to be exempt from any of these points about the composition of this defense.
Also, that defense you suggest is exactly what most would do so without thinking about it. When you do so, it's hard to get around Trouba being part of the defense. He has a NMC, and most view it as likely he'll be named captain before the start of this season. Thats not a player thats getting traded. That means that Lundkvist or Schneider gets traded. It almost has to be that. I know a lot don't want to trade a first round pick, so they'll try to invent other ideas, but I don't see any way around that.
As for the left side, you have created a defense that doesn't have a player on that left-side with 30 points or more. Jones is the only left-shot defenseman we have with a good puck game. It really makes absolutely zero sense to trade him. If there's a discussion to be made, it's about Miller vs. Robertson, or potentially Lindgren when his contract is up. Trading Jones is simply stupid, even if you also have Fox and Lundkvist. A defense with Fox, Lundkvist, and Jones is not too small. Fox is a Norris Trophy defenseman. He takes no hits, and wins the puck back better than any defenseman on the team. If you are worried about the size of Lundkvist and Jones, thats a fair point, but it's not for Fox. The Rangers would in that scenario have three bigger defenseman.
Also, that defense you suggest is exactly what most would do so without thinking about it. When you do so, it's hard to get around Trouba being part of the defense. He has a NMC, and most view it as likely he'll be named captain before the start of this season. Thats not a player thats getting traded. That means that Lundkvist or Schneider gets traded. It almost has to be that. I know a lot don't want to trade a first round pick, so they'll try to invent other ideas, but I don't see any way around that.
As for the left side, you have created a defense that doesn't have a player on that left-side with 30 points or more. Jones is the only left-shot defenseman we have with a good puck game. It really makes absolutely zero sense to trade him. If there's a discussion to be made, it's about Miller vs. Robertson, or potentially Lindgren when his contract is up. Trading Jones is simply stupid, even if you also have Fox and Lundkvist. A defense with Fox, Lundkvist, and Jones is not too small. Fox is a Norris Trophy defenseman. He takes no hits, and wins the puck back better than any defenseman on the team. If you are worried about the size of Lundkvist and Jones, thats a fair point, but it's not for Fox. The Rangers would in that scenario have three bigger defenseman.
Ad
Upcoming events
-
Game 4 Providence Bruins @ Hartford Wolf Pack - Hartford Wolf Pack leads series 2-1Wagers: 2Staked: $49.00Event closes- Updated:
-
Game 4 Belleville Senators @ Cleveland Monsters - Cleveland Monsters leads series 2-1Wagers: 2Staked: $125.00Event closes
- Updated:
-
Game 5 Syracuse Crunch @ Rochester Americans - Series tied 2-2Wagers: 2Staked: $1,100.00Event closes
- Updated:
-
SEMIFINAL GAME 2 - Minnesota @ Toronto - Toronto leads 1-0Wagers: 2Staked: $170.00Event closes- Updated:
