Proposal: Roster Building Thread Part IV: High Hopes

[Machinehead]

I know this is no surprise to you, but our coach ain't exactly super-human.

Touche

 

[Avery16]

That Smith doesn't exist.

He was getting scratched because Detroit's coach is subhuman.

SHHH Smith is a really common name, that must be a different Smith. Ours is worth 4.35 and an NTC

 

[NYR]

SHHH Smith is a really common name, that must be a different Smith. Ours is worth 4.35 and an NTC

Smith/ Klein..Same difference minus the offence

 

[NYR]

A dyslexic person walks into a bra.. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Nobody liked my joke? Pshh..

You people dead inside??

#ToughCrowd

 

[NYR]

Machinehead walks into a bar, holds up two fingers and says "Five beers, please"!

 

[Mamas Mustard]

Smith/ Klein..Same difference minus the offence

when it's put that way, it's hard to imagine giving him that contract

 

[NYR]

when it's put that way, it's hard to imagine giving him that contract

Exactly

 

[Levitate]

This is if everything falls in the best case scenario. For example:

Shattenkirk had, by far, a career year last season. What if he reverts to his old numbers? Are ~40-45 points worth it if he's playing as poorly in his own end as he did in Washington?

He'd still be far far far far far far far (pretend I kept typing this for about 5 minutes or so) better than any, ANY, ANY option they had at right D last year. It's literally not even debatable if you hope to be taken seriously as someone who has at some point in their life watched a game of hockey. I know I'm doing a pre-emptive "nuh uh you don't know anything!" comment there but show me a person who thinks the Rangers had a better option than Shattenkirk at RD and I'll show you a person who doesn't know hockey. I'm also of the opinion that he's not nearly as bad defensively as people think he is, his underlying numbers bear that out, and that even as a 45 point defenseman he'd be far far far far far (let's keep doing this again) better in that spot than any of their other options. He's also literally one of the best power play players in the entire league. If the power play doesn't improve then the coaches need to be fired because he's really really really really really good at that.

What if the issue with McD is his (repeated) shoulder injuries rather than his lining up next to Girardi? There is no guarantee that McD takes a huge leap forward next season.

I don't expect McD to take a huge leap forward next season. I think he probably will look better in some ways not having to play defense in his own end all the time but I also think people are far too hard on the player who has probably been the best overall player on this team for the past couple of years. They expect him to be perfect and it's not a fair expectation. He's an extremely good defenseman, a 1D, but he's not going to be perfect and he'll make mistakes like everyone else in the NHL

What if the Smith we get is the one who was getting scratched before the trade last season?

Smith's numbers have always been good even if Detroit decided to bench him. He'll also make mistakes sometimes but again, he's still literally better than anyone else they had at RD last year!

What if Skjei has a sophomore slump?

A slumping Skjei is likely still better than 2nd pair Marc Staal

What if Pionk/Bereglazov/ADA aren't ready?

They'll find a depth D. It is a "weak" spot but you have to be ready in today's NHL to try to get rookies into the lineup and prepare them so that they are ready.

What if our idiot coach STILL plays Staal and Holden 20+ minutes a game and buries Shattenkirk and Skjei at 5/6? Before you laugh, remember Yandle?

Yandle got top 4 minutes and the most PP time when he was here. People don't actually remember how Yandle was used. He got more minutes than Staal despite not being used on the PK like Staal. Yes I think AV still leaned on Staal in close late game situations and that was dumb but overall Yandle was still used OK.

This D has more POTENTIAL than last season's unit, but the people already christening it a top unit league wide are all assuming that a LOT of things break our way. I hope they are right, but it's not a given.

I think it's a given the D is better than last seasons. I"m not saying it's a top D or anything, and I think there will probably be some bumps as things are worked out and guys settle in, but it's hard to overstate just how BAD the right side of the Rangers D was last year and previous years. We all knew it was bad going into last year, we all said it was a weakness, we all watched it be bad, and now we're doing BS revisionist history and saying "oh well maybe now that they've added these clearly superior players it just has the POTENTIAL to be better but you never know!"

I don't think this team is better than last year's team. Gorton didn't fix the holes, he moved them. And on top of that, he created a roster that, if a couple of bad things happen (slumps/injuries), could see this team outside of the playoffs for the first time in years, IMO. That said, I DO think this team is better positioned to improve over the next couple of seasons than last year's group was. Similar short term outlook between this year and last year, but I think this year's group has a better long-term chance at success.

I mean...Stepan slumps at times, Zibanejad had a bad injury last year and screwed their center depth, 2014 Stepan breaks his leg in training camp and misses the start of the season, Rangers win the Presidents trophy that year with Brassard and Hayes as the top two centers replacing him during that time.

I do agree the center depth took a hit and this is a calculated gamble, but...I dunno, I think other parts of the team are strong enough to carry them for awhile if necessary. Also still a possibility they make more moves in the next month or two

The one thing I would criticize is the goalie situation. I'm worried Lundqvist is on a downward trend and don't have a ton of faith in Pavelec. However it sounds like some of the other guys they liked got bigger money elsewhere, and you can only afford what you can afford...

 

[BBKers]

Been lurking for a bit too long: so here come my thoughts on last year vs. this year

Vesey-Stepan-Nash
Kreider-Ziba-Zucc
Buch-Hayes-Miller
Grabner-Lindberg-Fast

McD-Girardi
Staal-Holden
Skjei-Smith


Losses:
Lindberg (expansion)
Stepan (trade)
Girardi (buyout)
Klein (retirement)
Pirri (SHL)

Additions:
Desharnais (FA)
Shattenkirk (FA)
Pionk (College FA)
DeAngelo (trade)
Bereglazov (FA)

Vesey-Zibanejad-Nash
Kreider-Hayes-Zucc
Buch-Desharnais-Miller
Grabner-?-Fast

McD-Shattenkirk
Skjei-Smith
Bereglazov/Staal-Bereglazov/Pionk/DeAngelo

Forwards:
Obviously losing Stepan was a big deal, our center depth is somewhat crippled now.
Do I have faith in Mika to step into that #1 role? Yes. Completely.
Do I have faith in Hayes to step into the #2 role? Yes, but not certain.

Hopefully, we see improvements from Mika, Hayes, Buch, Vesey, Miller, and Kreider. Obviously we can't assume any sort of improvement here, but I expect Buch and Vesey to step up, Buch motivated by ice time, and Vesey after having the longer season under his belt.



Backend:
No one here could possibly argue that Shattenkirk isn't a major upgrade over Girardi. He offers powerplay help we desperately need, and he is actually good at defense too (contrary to popular opinion).
The additionss of bereglazov/DeAngelo/Pionk on the third pair are pivotal. I saw a lot of Bereglazov last season in the KHL, and I have to say the guy is impressive. I'd be interested to see a Bereglazov-DeAngelo pairing, considering DeAngelo's offensive focus (Stralman-Hedman like). I could see him stepping on to most teams second pairings in the NHL. No matter which of the 3 plays, it's a major upgrade over Holden.

Our issue last year was not scoring. We had trouble keeping the puck out of our own net the entire year, and it wasn't always Hank's fault no matter what narrative you believe.


At the end of the day, I'd say this team is much better off than last year. Stepan, although great defensively, didn't provide much of our scoring last season. Thankfully, our revamped blue line should be able to pick up the defensive slack and more.

Good analogy. I will reserve my comments until Camp or even better yet opening night to see what's the team that we are icing then and there. We (almost)? all know at least one trade is coming and a depth signing or two. Let the smoke clear first. Then we can be critical if so need be. Defense looks infinitely better now on the right side (in theory) and let's not forget that offense begins with gaining control of the puck and getting it out of the zone in a creative way to ensure lethal possession going into the offensive zone. Last years Quattro of board bangers strategy - often right back to the opposition - was not a good way to sustain neither offensive pressure or possession and I am sure it also added to negatively impacting both our goalies stats. Wonder if our PP improves more than what our PK (in theory likely) gets worse? Will also be interesting to see...

 

[smoneil]

He'd still be far far far far far far far (pretend I kept typing this for about 5 minutes or so) better than any, ANY, ANY option they had at right D last year. It's literally not even debatable if you hope to be taken seriously as someone who has at some point in their life watched a game of hockey. I know I'm doing a pre-emptive "nuh uh you don't know anything!" comment there but show me a person who thinks the Rangers had a better option than Shattenkirk at RD and I'll show you a person who doesn't know hockey. I'm also of the opinion that he's not nearly as bad defensively as people think he is, his underlying numbers bear that out, and that even as a 45 point defenseman he'd be far far far far far (let's keep doing this again) better in that spot than any of their other options. He's also literally one of the best power play players in the entire league. If the power play doesn't improve then the coaches need to be fired because he's really really really really really good at that.

That's a lot of words to argue a point I wasn't making (never did I say the we DID have anyone better than Shatt last year on the right side). My point was in relation to the many posters saying that Shattenkirk replaced Stepan's production. That would be true on last season's numbers, but offensively, last season seems to be an aberration in his career. Still glad he's here (particularly on that term), but he isn't the savior a lot of folks have been making him out to be.

I don't expect McD to take a huge leap forward next season. I think he probably will look better in some ways not having to play defense in his own end all the time but I also think people are far too hard on the player who has probably been the best overall player on this team for the past couple of years. They expect him to be perfect and it's not a fair expectation. He's an extremely good defenseman, a 1D, but he's not going to be perfect and he'll make mistakes like everyone else in the NHL

I do actually think there is a decent chance that McD has an improved year (all of my comments on the D were looking at the worst case scenario for each one, as a counter to the folks who were doing a BEST case scenario for each guy--the truth is somewhere in the middle). I also agree that he gets too much flak. He and Stepan are very similar in my mind--they are both average 1C/1D's who do yeoman's work--the kind of stuff that never gets appreciated but that you need to do to win.

Smith's numbers have always been good even if Detroit decided to bench him. He'll also make mistakes sometimes but again, he's still literally better than anyone else they had at RD last year!

I don't know that I agree with that. I think Smith is, as someone else mentioned earlier in the thread, pretty similar to Klein. We expected Klein to be on the first or second pair at the start of last season. Replacing Klein with Smith keeps the status quo as it were on the 2nd pair RHD spot, in my view.

A slumping Skjei is likely still better than 2nd pair Marc Staal

But that isn't the debate. Skjei was better than Staal THIS season as well, but Staal played over him. Will AV do that again? Particularly is Skjei is struggling?

They'll find a depth D. It is a "weak" spot but you have to be ready in today's NHL to try to get rookies into the lineup and prepare them so that they are ready.

These are not just "rookies" though. Two of them have no NHL OR AHL experience. The other one has a history as a bit of a head case/discipline problem. And that's if they are even here. Be honest, would you be shocked if AV decided to go with Holden and Staal over these three?

Yandle got top 4 minutes and the most PP time when he was here. People don't actually remember how Yandle was used. He got more minutes than Staal despite not being used on the PK like Staal. Yes I think AV still leaned on Staal in close late game situations and that was dumb but overall Yandle was still used OK.

AV's usage of Yandle was inconsistent. He buried him at strange times, and had him on the 2nd PP unit for a looong stretch. Let me just say that, having watched AV for the last few years, he doesn't seem to learn obvious lessons. The odds of him putting a "growth pair" out there like Bereglazov/ADA instead of sticking with his guys (Staal/Holden) seem a mite astronomical to me.

I think it's a given the D is better than last seasons. I"m not saying it's a top D or anything, and I think there will probably be some bumps as things are worked out and guys settle in, but it's hard to overstate just how BAD the right side of the Rangers D was last year and previous years. We all knew it was bad going into last year, we all said it was a weakness, we all watched it be bad, and now we're doing BS revisionist history and saying "oh well maybe now that they've added these clearly superior players it just has the POTENTIAL to be better but you never know!"

I hope it is, but a lot has to go right. I will say that I think it will be better offensively, to be sure. Remember, it looks fantastic on preseason paper. Last year's D didn't look so bad at this time, either. We heard all about how Girardi wasn't going to play as much. We were thinking we'd have pairs of McD/Klein, Staal/McIlrath, and Skjei/Girardi/Holden. But then AV decided to roll Staal and Holden and Girardi out there every other shift. It's what he does. If he HAS his toys, he's going to play with them and there isn't anyone who can tell him different. I'm just saying that we need to approach the D this season with a bit more caution and skepticism, because what's on paper and what hits the ice are often very very very (assume I spent another 5 minutes typing more "very"s ) different.

I mean...Stepan slumps at times, Zibanejad had a bad injury last year and screwed their center depth, 2014 Stepan breaks his leg in training camp and misses the start of the season, Rangers win the Presidents trophy that year with Brassard and Hayes as the top two centers replacing him during that time.

I do agree the center depth took a hit and this is a calculated gamble, but...I dunno, I think other parts of the team are strong enough to carry them for awhile if necessary. Also still a possibility they make more moves in the next month or two

You kind of reinforced my point here. We had Stepan and Brassard, with Hayes to step in in case of injury. Then we had Stepan and Zibanejad, with Hayes to step in in case of injury. Now we have Zib and Hayes, both playing the tougher minutes that Stepan used to shield them from, and if we have an injury (which again, as you just pointed out, isn't uncommon), we have...who, exactly who can step up into a top six C role? DD? Miller? One should never have played top six to begin with and the other hasn't played center regularly in years. And that's not even addressing the question of who plays the C in the bottom six, or who mans the PK units (everybody wants to talk about the PP, but our PK has been just as big an issue the last two years).

The one thing I would criticize is the goalie situation. I'm worried Lundqvist is on a downward trend and don't have a ton of faith in Pavelec. However it sounds like some of the other guys they liked got bigger money elsewhere, and you can only afford what you can afford...

I think they wanted a short term solution to cover a year or two until Henrik's heir apparent joins the team. Wouldn't surprise me if they tried to platoon Henrik and Shesty next year or the year after.

 

[BBKers]

Another important thing. If Miller and Hayes want Kreider money and are expecting second line payments on their new shiny contracts then they have to step up and both prove they are ready and worth this. More consistently for sure. I am sure they are aware of this too. Could b a very good motivater as well as a litmus test to see who is up to the task and who is not. Otherwise they can be put into RBs trade and get younger category as far as I am concerned...