Exactly. I mean, we're supposed to just forget about six years of being a crappy player because he hasn't been terrible over three preseason games? Come on.
Tanner Glass
- Thread starter Savant
- Start date
Exactly. I mean, we're supposed to just forget about six years of being a crappy player because he hasn't been terrible over three preseason games? Come on.
BobMarleyNYR
Rangers future on D
Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,354
I don't think most are jumping to conclusions, but he has done everything right this pre-season. Just because many are happy with what we saw doesn't mean he will continue that into the real season, nor does it mean that the signing wasn't still a mistake.
Regardless, he's a Ranger now, so I'm happy to see positive signs from him. Like everything else, all we have to go off of now is the few pre-season games he's had with us. Like many of the rookies, we will have to wait until the season starts to see if his off-season regimen really did pay dividends and if he will be a valuable part of this team, or a plug like Pyatt.
What I can conclude though, is that I'm personally far more optimistic about him now then I was a month ago.
I'm not jumping to any conclusions.
The fact is that Glass was all but plucked and spitted over coals here before he played a game. It was ridiculous at times.
He's had a solid pre season. I think most can agree on that....or maybe not. We'll see what the regular season brings
Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,354
There is a reasonable level of concern over any players past performance. But this is not the place for reasonable.
Things go over the top here on a regular basis. I get that and I enjoy it and also enjoy pointing it out. Some folks here turn certain players into their sacred guilty pleasure. The chosen player becomes the classic whipping boy. It's brutal but comical in typical HFNYR tradition.
Things go over the top here on a regular basis. I get that and I enjoy it and also enjoy pointing it out. Some folks here turn certain players into their sacred guilty pleasure. The chosen player becomes the classic whipping boy. It's brutal but comical in typical HFNYR tradition.
So to clarify, some people are upset about signing Tanner Glass because of years of evidence that he is a terrible hockey player. Other people have posted their delight with his play through three preseason games and insist he's a good fit. The people who are being "over the top" here are the ones opting to favor years of evidence over three preseason games. Is this your point?
Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,354
Put down the pipe, Bob. It's not that hard to follow. I prefer the team to which I have fanatical devotion sign good players.
Lindberg Cheese
Registered User
Glass will be fine I believe, if not Malone should do just as well. Who knows how he'll ultimately perform and I'm sure that everyone wants him to do great but all that aside the contract still blows something awful.
egelband
Registered User
- Sep 6, 2008
- 15,970
- 14,667
I assume the coaching staff and front office has a reason for signing the guy. And I assume the price was set by the market.
So I'm happy to give the guy a chance. If he can play good defense, police the ice a bit, and keep opponents on their toes (cleanly) I think it'll prove a good signing.
Edit: I do agree that success in the preseason and success in the regular season are two very different things.
So I'm happy to give the guy a chance. If he can play good defense, police the ice a bit, and keep opponents on their toes (cleanly) I think it'll prove a good signing.
Edit: I do agree that success in the preseason and success in the regular season are two very different things.
eco's bones
Registered User
More interesting is the idea that someone say like Hrivik is going to walk in and be the 4th line player that Glass is not. I honestly don't think Hrivik offers more. He might put up a few more points but he might not. He's never exactly tore up the AHL and frankly last year's numbers were disappointing. He might kill penalties as effectively but there's no guarantee there either. He certainly isn't going to defend his teammates if an event were to happen. So...there may not be as many miracle replacements as some would have it. Jesper Fast on the other hand I have a little more faith in that he's for real.
It is baffling to me that there is such passionate stances here against Tanner. Baffling.
Is he on our team? Yes. We should all be rooting for him to succeed.
He's looked fine so far. No one is in here expecting him to be the key part to making the playoffs.
He's here to forecheck well, penalty kill, and protect our players. To that extent, he has looked fine.
Under the event that he does not fulfill these responsibilities, we should all be quite pleased that we have such young depth that can slide in and assume the role he was given.
But until that time, what is the point? He's a 4th line player who can easily be a healthy scratch. He makes 1.4 million dollars? So ****ing what? By year 3 of his contract that will be the same percentage of the cap as a 1 million dollar contract is now.
He doesn't have good "advanced" statistics? All i've read on here is that he's one of the worst players in the league respective to teams having the puck. No ****, who would feel comfortable with Tanner Glass controlling and skating with the puck? He dumps it in, immediately becomes defensive. Board battles, forechecks, penalty kills... He is not an offensive player... and looking at our current roster build up - i'm perfectly fine with that. If our top 3 lines perform as we expect them to then this is a moot point.
As long as he come in, plays hard, wins board battles, penalty kills effectively, and protects our key players... then to me, he is earning his contract and his place on the starting 12. We should all be rooting for that.
Instead, what's the objective and incentive here to fervently argue about how bad he has been and what his advanced statistics "prove"? That you may be right and can tell us "I told you so?". Seems some of you have your agendas in the wrong order.
Is he on our team? Yes. We should all be rooting for him to succeed.
He's looked fine so far. No one is in here expecting him to be the key part to making the playoffs.
He's here to forecheck well, penalty kill, and protect our players. To that extent, he has looked fine.
Under the event that he does not fulfill these responsibilities, we should all be quite pleased that we have such young depth that can slide in and assume the role he was given.
But until that time, what is the point? He's a 4th line player who can easily be a healthy scratch. He makes 1.4 million dollars? So ****ing what? By year 3 of his contract that will be the same percentage of the cap as a 1 million dollar contract is now.
He doesn't have good "advanced" statistics? All i've read on here is that he's one of the worst players in the league respective to teams having the puck. No ****, who would feel comfortable with Tanner Glass controlling and skating with the puck? He dumps it in, immediately becomes defensive. Board battles, forechecks, penalty kills... He is not an offensive player... and looking at our current roster build up - i'm perfectly fine with that. If our top 3 lines perform as we expect them to then this is a moot point.
As long as he come in, plays hard, wins board battles, penalty kills effectively, and protects our key players... then to me, he is earning his contract and his place on the starting 12. We should all be rooting for that.
Instead, what's the objective and incentive here to fervently argue about how bad he has been and what his advanced statistics "prove"? That you may be right and can tell us "I told you so?". Seems some of you have your agendas in the wrong order.
Well said
All of us will have opinions about certain players but at the end of the day they are Rangers. I always root for players to make me eat crow.
Can you point in the direction of anyone who is actively rooting against Tanner Glass? Pointing out that Tanner Glass sucks is not the same thing as hoping that Tanner Glass doesn't succeed.
Okay. I don't see why this is supposed to make anyone feel better. Last season I think everyone would agree that the fourth-line played a pretty important role. Why should we suddenly be okay with a measurable downgrade? And what happens when we DO get into the playoffs? The Rangers probably don't get passed Pittsburgh without the fourth line, and the season before against the Bruins the fourth line was an obvious disaster. What then?
If he was good at forechecking, then he wouldn't have some of the worst possession stats in the NHL over the last 5 years. A good forechecker presumably keeps the puck in the offensive end. Glass obviously does not do so. If he was a good penalty killer, then he wouldn't have some of the worst possession stats in the NHL on the penalty kill.
Please find me anything that proves that "protecting players" is something that actually works. I see people bring it up a lot and yet I've never seen anyone give evidence that proves it works.
Or, we could look at it as, we have a lot of young depth who are now being sent to the AHL so this scrub can stay in the lineup. And when he does not fulfill these responsibilities, then the Rangers are stuck with yet another awful contract that impacts the salary cap no matter where he goes.
Maybe you were hibernating this summer or something, but the Rangers lost a few pretty good players because of the salary cap. This is not a team in a position to waste any salary cap space.
Holy crap what the hell am I reading? You speak as if immediately giving the puck to the other team and "becoming defensive" is a good thing. Teams who have the puck more tend to create more offense, who tend to get more shots, who therefore tend to get more goals. That's exactly the point. I don't think you understand what defense actually is. Dominic Moore is a good shutdown, defensive player because he not only makes good decisions in the defensive end, but because once he gets the puck to center ice, he is able to KEEP IT. If he's holding the puck in the corner of the offensive zone for 30 seconds, then that's 30 seconds of a 50 second shift for, let's say, Bobby Ryan, where Ryan doesn't even have the chance to create offense. If Tanner Glass just dumps the puck in and "gets defensive" then it's just inviting Ryan and whoever else is on the ice to come at the Rangers with the puck. This is the equivalent of you clapping for a football team who punts the ball to the opposing 20-yard line instead of just getting the first down in the first place to keep the ball out of Peyton Manning's hands altogether.
Yes, I don't think anyone here disagrees. If Glass does those things then he'll be earning his contract. And I'm sure everyone here is rooting for that. Unfortunately, we have multiple years of evidence that prove he has never been capable of actually doing any of those things. "If Kevin Klein puts up 40 points then he'll be a Norris Trophy candidate." Yes he will be, but so ****ing what? Is there any reason to expect he'll actually be able to do that? We can make up ******** hypotheticals all day.
I don't know. What's the point of coming to HFBoards in the first place. A few people have bumped this thread to discuss how super awesome his preseason has been. What are you expecting? This is a discussion board. No **** people are going to respond with harsh reality. Or should the moderators enact a rule that all posts have to be positive? No criticizing anything ever, guys!
Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,354
Another day, another "you're rooting against Glass" strawman.
ZZZZZZZzzzzz.
This fight is really unfair. You guys have all these creative narratives and all I have is mounds of evidence.
ZZZZZZZzzzzz.
This fight is really unfair. You guys have all these creative narratives and all I have is mounds of evidence.
haveandare
Registered User
Wow, the arrogance on display in here is really something else.
Glass has played well so far this preseason. If he continues to play like this, he'll be a good signing. If he doesn't, he won't be, and he can easily be moved.
People were making him sound as if he was such a complete waste of a player that there was no way he could possibly do any good in any situation. Now, we've seen him do passably well in the preseason in a number of games. Naturally, people are starting to question whether or not the talk about him was hyperbole or whether he will actually prove to be completely useless once the real games start.
Those who were so sure that he'd be awful no matter what are saying, "wait till the real games start."Most of those who are skeptical are saying, "okay, let's do that."
Where on earth is all this back-patting and arrogant BS coming from? Jesus. This board is for hockey talk, yet every year it turns more into people making predictions and then rubbing them in people's faces when they're right, or disappearing into the background when they're wrong. The attitude is becoming one of poster arguing against poster far more than fan talking with fan. I think that self-congratulatory stuff is absolutely ridiculous and ruins an otherwise decent place to talk about hockey.
Glass has played well so far this preseason. If he continues to play like this, he'll be a good signing. If he doesn't, he won't be, and he can easily be moved.
People were making him sound as if he was such a complete waste of a player that there was no way he could possibly do any good in any situation. Now, we've seen him do passably well in the preseason in a number of games. Naturally, people are starting to question whether or not the talk about him was hyperbole or whether he will actually prove to be completely useless once the real games start.
Those who were so sure that he'd be awful no matter what are saying, "wait till the real games start."Most of those who are skeptical are saying, "okay, let's do that."
Where on earth is all this back-patting and arrogant BS coming from? Jesus. This board is for hockey talk, yet every year it turns more into people making predictions and then rubbing them in people's faces when they're right, or disappearing into the background when they're wrong. The attitude is becoming one of poster arguing against poster far more than fan talking with fan. I think that self-congratulatory stuff is absolutely ridiculous and ruins an otherwise decent place to talk about hockey.
Hmmm. I'm not the one on this thread talking about the advanced statistics of our 12th forward at nauseam trying to push my own personal agenda.
"Arrogance" is thinking that you can watch three preseason games and draw conclusions from it that contradict six years of awful hockey.
Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,354
What is my personal agenda? For the Rangers to ice as strong a team as possible?
If you want to argue why it's not important that he's been a puck possession anchor for six seasons, or why the 30 year old is suddenly going to change, I'd be open to hearing your argument. I think the "You're hoping against Glass" and the "he's looked good in 30 preseason minutes" angles are well played out, however.
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
French Open - Women's Jasmine Paolini vs Mirra AndreevaWagers: 7Staked: $4,914.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
-
