Player Discussion Tony DeAngelo (MOD WARNINGS: Post #12/#900)

[ReggieDunlop68]

Try Xanax.

I’m not anxious.

I meant a medium to bridge me whatever echo chamber is causing all of this shit.

 

[NYRFANMANI]

You're certainly uselessly irritated.

 

[ReggieDunlop68]

You're certainly uselessly irritated.

I’m irriated because I have this issue from time to time where I get into discussions with some of you thinking it’s an actual sports discussion on gasp... a sports discussion forum, and it just turns out to be fanboyism or meme-ing.

That’s why I asked for a medium.

Anyway, it’s early in the morning and I was just responding to your long winded corny ass response to me about ADA’s feelings.

You should chill too honey boo boo

 

[tradenashnow]

DeAngelo is not the answer going forward. I'm starting to think Pionk isn't either. That Lundkvist pick makes a lot more sense now.

 

[NYR Viper]

What, I believe, bothers many people, is that for where this team is currently, DeAngelo should be getting every opportunity to play. He has the skill to be an everyday NHL defenseman. Let him play through some of his mistakes. Smith, Staal, Skjei, Shattenkirk, McQuaid, Pionk and Claesson aren't perfect. Most of these guys don't have a chance of being around by the time the team is competing. At least ADA has a chance.

 

[Riche16]

What, I believe, bothers many people, is that for where this team is currently, DeAngelo should be getting every opportunity to play. He has the skill to be an everyday NHL defenseman. Let him play through some of his mistakes. Smith, Staal, Skjei, Shattenkirk, McQuaid, Pionk and Claesson aren't perfect. Most of these guys don't have a chance of being around by the time the team is competing. At least ADA has a chance.

Well people keep saying we are “showcasing” those guys...

What f***ing value have we “showcased” in those plugs????

 

[mulli25]

I'm not buying the showcasing idea.

Everything I've heard/observed from Quinn leads me to believe that ADA is consistently doing and/or not doing things that have been specifically addressed with him. Above all else, Quinn is looking to instill a specific mentality and approach to the game. The ticket to ice time appears to be consistent effort and doing the things we wants you to do on the ice. This would explain seemingly unwavering support for players like Howden, Pionk, and even Staal despite inconsistent performance.

Quinn has demonstrated tolerance for lack-luster play, as long as your giving full effort and doing what's asked of you. The way I see it, ADA is likely falling short of the coaches' expectations in one or both of those areas.

 

[SA16]

There's no such thing as showcasing. Coaches try to win. They are not going to play a player they believe is inferior in a bigger role so another scout can see him play.

 

[offdacrossbar]

ADA with the proper partner, is an asset period. every time hes played, hes been productive and defensively responsible. his play dipped along with the rest of the team.

let him pay the pp2 point man qb role and he will be fine.

give him a smart, mobile defensive partner and the kid will be fine.

no idea what's up with him and Q but it seems like hes the odd man out for whatever reason.

my gut tells me its personal because he hasn't been bad and when hes played the team wins and when he sits they lose. its personal.

 

[Off Sides]

I was trying to say wtf do you care so much about ADA. It’s NOT just you, and it’s weird.

And he’s not so awesome that the Rangers are focusing on sitting him to tank.

And the whole thing worrying about his confidence and ****. **** man...

The reason I care is because he is at the very least a decent prospect who could play at least on the 3rd pair RD, look at who the Rangers have tried on RD over the years, look at who they are currently playing on RD. It's not good.

So eventually should they not even try to develop ADA what is their solution going to be? To trade for some other McQuaid who is long past his prime? To bring in another Smith? Both of whom will cost in cap space and possibly trade assets more than them just using ADA? Trade for and move another Holden over to RD?

It is of lesser importance in the grand scheme of things but it's kind of silly for them to be spending, between Shattenkirk, Smith and McQuaid over 13M in cap space on those players, where two of them have some sort of clauses, and are still signed for two more seasons after this one. It's not like they are even good or even decent trade assets that are going to return much of anything if they continue to play as they are.

Basically it's the same argument I'd make for Pionk, these younger RD players even if they are not all that good make way more sense to just use and develop than the Rangers going out after the guys they have in the past. Even Claesson is cheap and can play RD here and there and he is a better option going forward than Smith or the next McQuaid.

Once they become more expensive, sure a choice has to be made on whether or not to stick with them. Hopefully a better choice will be made there than was made with Girardi who they signed long term and bought out to bring in Shattenkirk, Smith who was waived last year with no takers, letting Stralman walk to sign Boyle.

If you want to debate that ADA stinks, okay fine, but within that debate you would have to compare his stinkage, his cap, his term, his possible trade value if he played versus them and versus what the Rangers next "solution" to the RD would possibly be.

It's not like the Rangers opinion on defensemen should not be in question here, they've had like what? three RD who should have been playing above the 3rd pair since the salary cap has been implemented regardless on how much they've spent on them?

It's not a conspiracy theory, it's a cycle of them thinking some imported vet solution is going to turn out all that much better than what they could just develop. Good top 4 vet RD are difficult to come by league wide, Rangers thinking the ones being made available out there are solutions beyond 3rd pair is a bad theory from the get go.

 

[ReggieDunlop68]

The reason I care is because he is at the very least a decent prospect who could play at least on the 3rd pair RD, look at who the Rangers have tried on RD over the years, look at who they are currently playing on RD. It's not good.

So eventually should they not even try to develop ADA what is their solution going to be? To trade for some other McQuaid who is long past his prime? To bring in another Smith? Both of whom will cost in cap space and possibly trade assets more than them just using ADA? Trade for and move another Holden over to RD?

It is of lesser importance in the grand scheme of things but it's kind of silly for them to be spending, between Shattenkirk, Smith and McQuaid over 13M in cap space on those players, where two of them have some sort of clauses, and are still signed for two more seasons after this one. It's not like they are even good or even decent trade assets that are going to return much of anything if they continue to play as they are.

Basically it's the same argument I'd make for Pionk, these younger RD players even if they are not all that good make way more sense to just use and develop than the Rangers going out after the guys they have in the past. Even Claesson is cheap and can play RD here and there and he is a better option going forward than Smith or the next McQuaid.

Once they become more expensive, sure a choice has to be made on whether or not to stick with them. Hopefully a better choice will be made there than was made with Girardi who they signed long term and bought out to bring in Shattenkirk, Smith who was waived last year with no takers, letting Stralman walk to sign Boyle.

If you want to debate that ADA stinks, okay fine, but within that debate you would have to compare his stinkage, his cap, his term, his possible trade value if he played versus them and versus what the Rangers next "solution" to the RD would possibly be.

It's not like the Rangers opinion on defensemen should not be in question here, they've had like what? three RD who should have been playing above the 3rd pair since the salary cap has been implemented regardless on how much they've spent on them?

It's not a conspiracy theory, it's a cycle of them thinking some imported vet solution is going to turn out all that much better than what they could just develop. Good top 4 vet RD are difficult to come by league wide, Rangers thinking the ones being made available out there are solutions beyond 3rd pair is a bad theory from the get go.

We can “what if” anything, yet All we see is what we see.

“Plugs”, “guys who shouldn’t be in the NHL”, “pets”, only score because they are big” and other catch phrases are used to try to explain why a long line of hopefuls never make it fizzle out every season.

The ”infobesity” of information on the internet has made full head way into sports.

People spend to much time tweeting his CHL numbers relating him to Paul Coffey [HA!] than thinking maybe he was a little old for his draft year or whatever...

 

[Off Sides]

We can “what if” anything, yet All we see is what we see.

“Plugs”, “guys who shouldn’t be in the NHL”, “pets”, only score because they are big” and other catch phrases are used to try to explain why a long line of hopefuls never make it fizzle out every season.

The ”infobesity” of information on the internet has made full head way into sports.

People spend to much time tweeting his CHL numbers relating him to Paul Coffey [HA!] than thinking maybe he was a little old for his draft year or whatever...

Much of that was not what ifs, it was the Rangers history concerning RD and how they ended up there.

I don't share the opinion that ADA, Pionk, Claesson are all that great but their performance is about on par and their cap space is so much less compared to Smith, Shattenkirk, McQuaid.

If the Rangers are ever going to really contend they can't be wasting cap space on stuff when the other option is to go cheap and get about the same level of performance. I mean Pionk in all his glory has surpassed Shattenkirk and Smith on the depth chart, there is no on ice reason that ADA can't be viewed in the same light.

And again if they don't like ADA, fine not my call, but playing him when there is a shortage of decent RD in the league has to help any trade value he would have. As is he is probably viewed league wide as some people view him here, try to change that perspective to turn him into a positive asset. Him being scratched and playing behind the vets who can not return anything by trade is doing the opposite.

Then once he is gone, try Bigras along with Pionk instead of bringing in some other McQuaid or Smith.

I also don't think Bigras will be all that great yet in comparison given his contract, term, sign me up even if he has stinkage attached to him as well.

 

[Vinny DeAngelo]

ADA with the proper partner, is an asset period. every time hes played, hes been productive and defensively responsible. his play dipped along with the rest of the team.

let him pay the pp2 point man qb role and he will be fine.

give him a smart, mobile defensive partner and the kid will be fine.

no idea what's up with him and Q but it seems like hes the odd man out for whatever reason.

my gut tells me its personal because he hasn't been bad and when hes played the team wins and when he sits they lose. its personal.

I'm convinced its more Ruff than Quinn. Ruff is known for a harsh personality, I'm sure the young cocky kid rubs him the wrong way

 

[Hi ImHFNYR]

Nothing matters until they draft the top end.

You keep making really poor points like this.

Did we draft in the top end leading up to 2012-2015?

No. So obviously you can compete for a cup and play tons of meaningful hockey without doing so. You could win one too even though we came up short.

Bad players with no upside are played over better, younger players with more upside who also happen to be performing better. Your point is..."well those better players arent hall of famers so it doesnt matter". That's really dumb and lazy. So we should dump zibby and bring in Brian Boyle bc neither is a hall of Famer?

No, bc you dont constantly play inferior talent over more talented, better players. This goes for the entire lineup

I could see if your argument was that ada is not that much better. That it's too close to worry about. In fact I'm sure you are getting at this by creating really silly hyperbolic points that reference hfnyr talking points. But then you say other things like this and it's unclear if you're using frequently absurd hyperbolic references to make points or if you're just talking just to talk

You also keep erroneously labeling things "what ifs" and " conspiracy theories " when they arent

 

[True Blue]

What ****ing value have we “showcased” in those plugs????

One can make a case that Smith (definitely) and Shattenkirk (probably) should not see the ice again. Not likely, but I have had enough of the both of them. No reason for AdA not to be playing in favor of those two.

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

One can make a case that Smith (definitely) and Shattenkirk (probably) should not see the ice again. Not likely, but I have had enough of the both of them. No reason for AdA not to be playing in favor of those two.

I don't really know what the philosophy of the franchise is at this point. It should be to begin the figure who is a part of the core moving forward and who is not. The next thing is to figure out what is best for each player. ADA needs to play. A guy like Howden might be well served by a couple of weeks in Hartford. Georgiev needs to play more or go down and play.

 

[The Crypto Guy]

DeAngelo is not the answer going forward. I'm starting to think Pionk isn't either. That Lundkvist pick makes a lot more sense now.

Oh good, please tell us about Lundkvist , especially how many times you've watched him play since we drafted him.

 

[The Crypto Guy]

I was trying to say wtf do you care so much about ADA. It’s NOT just you, and it’s weird.

And he’s not so awesome that the Rangers are focusing on sitting him to tank.

And the whole thing worrying about his confidence and ****. **** man...

What's weird is you just keep coming back to this thread to troll. We get it, you don't like him because he hurt your feelings, message boards aren't safe zones, so you are going to have to just deal with people having different opinions than you and liking a good young player.

 

[ReggieDunlop68]

Much of that was not what ifs, it was the Rangers history concerning RD and how they ended up there.

I don't share the opinion that ADA, Pionk, Claesson are all that great but their performance is about on par and their cap space is so much less compared to Smith, Shattenkirk, McQuaid.

If the Rangers are ever going to really contend they can't be wasting cap space on stuff when the other option is to go cheap and get about the same level of performance. I mean Pionk in all his glory has surpassed Shattenkirk and Smith on the depth chart, there is no on ice reason that ADA can't be viewed in the same light.

And again if they don't like ADA, fine not my call, but playing him when there is a shortage of decent RD in the league has to help any trade value he would have. As is he is probably viewed league wide as some people view him here, try to change that perspective to turn him into a positive asset. Him being scratched and playing behind the vets who can not return anything by trade is doing the opposite.

Then once he is gone, try Bigras along with Pionk instead of bringing in some other McQuaid or Smith.

I also don't think Bigras will be all that great yet in comparison given his contract, term, sign me up even if he has stinkage attached to him as well.

Idk maybe they will bottom out and draft a real one.

 

[True Blue]

I don't really know what the philosophy of the franchise is at this point. It should be to begin the figure who is a part of the core moving forward and who is not. The next thing is to figure out what is best for each player. ADA needs to play. A guy like Howden might be well served by a couple of weeks in Hartford. Georgiev needs to play more or go down and play.

At a certain point, you need to call a spade a spade. If they think that Shattenkirk is salvageable and can be traded next year, that is one thing. I disagree and think that they should cut their losses, but I am neither Gorton nor Quinn.

Smith, otoh, what am I missing? This guy has been given 2nd, 3rd, 4th chances and has been an absolute ZERO. He cannot be traded for assets (not an NHL scout, but the eye test is not lying here). You would probably have to bribe a team with a pick or an asset of your own to take him, which is not something this organization can afford to do. Or he would be traded to another team looking to unload a bad contract, which also does not help the Rangers. Playing him more has not really been raising his trade value but eroding it even more. Here is a case where they truly need to cut bait and just remove him from the lineup. Play ADA to see if he has a future with the franchise.

Staal is not really tradeable unless they would be willing to eat 2/3 of his salary. So he is staying, I think. I would put out inquiries about Skej, but if you get rid of him, then what does the defense look like?

Howden, not sure about. If he is playing good minutes, then playing up with the big team is a good option. Georgiev should be playing more.

 

[ReggieDunlop68]

You keep making really poor points like this.

Did we draft in the top end leading up to 2012-2015?

No. So obviously you can compete for a cup and play tons of meaningful hockey without doing so. You could win one too even though we came up short.

Bad players with no upside are played over better, younger players with more upside who also happen to be performing better. Your point is..."well those better players arent hall of famers so it doesnt matter". That's really dumb and lazy. So we should dump zibby and bring in Brian Boyle bc neither is a hall of Famer?

No, bc you dont constantly play inferior talent over more talented, better players. This goes for the entire lineup

I could see if your argument was that ada is not that much better. That it's too close to worry about. In fact I'm sure you are getting at this by creating really silly hyperbolic points that reference hfnyr talking points. But then you say other things like this and it's unclear if you're using frequently absurd hyperbolic references to make points or if you're just talking just to talk

You also keep erroneously labeling things "what ifs" and " conspiracy theories
" when they arent

We would have won if they bottomed out for a bit early in the King’s career.

 

[ReggieDunlop68]

What's weird is you just keep coming back to this thread to troll. We get it, you don't like him because he hurt your feelings, message boards aren't safe zones, so you are going to have to just deal with people having different opinions than you and liking a good young player.

Again...the irony.

 

[Off Sides]

Idk maybe they will bottom out and draft a real one.

That is my hope too but in the mean time this Smith, Shattenkirk, McQuaid stuff is pretty useless, and in retrospect if they take away any chance that the Pionk, ADA, Claesson's of the world could have improved by playing more, and even turned into cheap bottom pair guys who could still be here to play behind the real one(s) they drafted...

I guess I just don't get it. The Rangers really either believe that those more expensive vet players are going to recover and lead to something or they are playing them just because they already acquired them, or because coaching likes them or thinks they are going to win more with them, or thinks they are helping the development of others even while taking playing time away from them but I just can't get behind that logic no matter how they are slicing it.