Who is the biggest disappointment?

[Mr Clutch]

definitely asham...I mean the guy hardly shows up.......





kidding of course!

 

[stan the caddy]

It's not that the Rangers are an offensive black hole, it's just that the "elite talent" they target tends to be people who are chasing big paychecks, or have demanded a change of scenery. Not much incentive to play your ass off once you get your way.

I fully expect MSL to get his act together, but Nash is another story. The hope was that once he freed himself from the confines of a bottom-dweller like Columbus he would find that "elite gear" and realize his full potential. Turns out he's just a lazy player who can't motivate himself. Hence he's played his best hockey under whip crackers like Tortorella and Hitchcock, but has been grossly inconsistent otherwise.

It's not like the Rangers have forgone chances to go after players like Crosby and Toews. They go after guys that are available. That's all you can do.

The Nash hate is like the Melo hate. Fans blame him because he's not Lebron.

 

[Leonardo87]

It's not like the Rangers have forgone chances to go after players like Crosby and Toews. They go after guys that are available. That's all you can do.

The Nash hate is like the Melo hate. Fans blame him because he's not Lebron.

It is the Ranger fan, make that NY fan way. Unless you are performing well in every single game, then get the F out of here.

The guy has 22 Goals and is blowing away the rest of the team. It's just amazing how bitter some fans can be.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

It's not like the Rangers have forgone chances to go after players like Crosby and Toews. They go after guys that are available. That's all you can do.

The Nash hate is like the Melo hate. Fans blame him because he's not Lebron.

Thats not all you can do. You could also show some patience and not gobble up every free agent or disgruntled player on the market -- this, however, requires an organization plan that targets the right players (LOL!)

 

[aufheben]

Marc Staal has been a disappointment on the offensive side of the puck.

 

[Trxjw]

Agreed.

Although I also think the lack of a top-end center is a driving reason for the offensive futility. The Rangers have very few players who make their teammates better.

I definitely agree with the last point. I think you can get by with centers who aren't in that "elite" category, but they have to make the players around them better. Find those guys, or find players who are better as a team than they are individually. The Rangers accidentally stumbled into that with the 11-12 roster, but they've failed to embrace any sort of team building strategy.

 

[Trxjw]

It's not like the Rangers have forgone chances to go after players like Crosby and Toews. They go after guys that are available. That's all you can do.

The Nash hate is like the Melo hate. Fans blame him because he's not Lebron.

Just because a guy is available, it doesn't mean the team should go after him. Just because a guy says he wants to be traded to NY, it doesn't mean the team should go out of their way to acquire him. Sometimes restraint is the best course of action.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

I definitely agree with the last point. I think you can get by with centers who aren't in that "elite" category, but they have to make the players around them better. Find those guys, or find players who are better as a team than they are individually. The Rangers accidentally stumbled into that with the 11-12 roster, but they've failed to embrace any sort of team building strategy.

The argument about just how good the '11-12 team was has been beaten to death. But what is undeniable is they were a team that was greater than the sum of their parts. They were all pulling in the same direction and the results were better than they should've been on paper. Thats a really tough foundation to create and, as you said, the Rangers were lucky to have stumbled upon it. Its the type of foundation that should be added to and tweaked, not ripped apart at the seems in search of that elite talent.

 

[5 4 Fighting]

We had a good thing going as a team, now we are back talking about the names on the back of the jerseys.

 

[True Blue]

The Nash hate is like the Melo hate. Fans blame him because he's not Lebron.

No one blames Nash because he is not Gretzky. However, he was acquired to be a difference maker. He had a lot of assets given up for him. He takes up a lot of cap space. His salary is that of an elite players.

Fairly easy to see why he disappoints people.

 

[Inferno]

No one blames Nash because he is not Gretzky. However, he was acquired to be a difference maker. He had a lot of assets given up for him. He takes up a lot of cap space. His salary is that of an elite players.

Fairly easy to see why he disappoints people.

doesnt he lead the team in goals and GWG despite missing a ton of time with concussions?

Nash has had a few lazy games here and there, but by and large he's been our most consistent offensive threats. TBH a lot of Nashs failures are because of Stepans play for the bulk of this season. Since the olympics Stepans been playing better, and Nash has picked up a few goals since then as well.



I think Nash gets a lot of undeserved hate.

The Rangers arent losing because of Rick Nash on most nights.

I mean, just compare the number of GWG/GP and he's right up there with Stamkos, Crosby, Ovechkin, etc.

I think if you raised Nashs game up a notch to where it was last year, it wouldnt have even a fraction of the impact on this team as raising Henriks game to where he was last year.

 

[Steve Kournianos]

I expect a better way to find a limited 30 goal scorer than the approach Sather took.

He tried through the draft. The 2012 team were mostly Rangers draftees. None were consistent goal scorers.

He tried via free agency. Gaborik is the lone success story.


He tried via trade. As of now, Nash has been a consistent goal scorer, but at a Ranger pace.

When is Sather going to acquire a 30-goal scorer on the cheap? Wheres his Goligoski for Neal trade?

 

[Inferno]

1 more thing about Henrik. I know a lot of people talk about the quality of chances we give up now vs last year, and im not going ot deny that the slot does seem very dangerous for us now vs last time around. However, I think that people are completely glossing over this one pretty simple fact.

Last year, and really for his entire career here, Henrik Lundqvist was the best player on the ice for the vast majority of his starts. He would quite often win us games we didnt deserve to win. We'd be outchanced, outshot, out everythinged and he'd win us the game 3-2.

The 6 goalie system or whateve ryou want to call it constantly led to deflection chances, goalmouth scrambles, etc. It's not leading to as many of those now, instead we have movement and coverage issues that we didnt have before.

However I think most of us agree that the team we have this year, has outplayed the opposition on most night significantly more than they have in past years. Theyve lost these games due to a combination of Henrik playing poorly, and the offense being inadequate at finishing chances/opposition goalies playing well.

To me, the eyeball test is failed for Henrik this year (By and large). At times he's looked like his old self, and at times he looks lost out there.

Before Henrik would have like 1 bad month and then right the ship..but this year it seems like its been since the start of the season....1 bad start, 1 good start, 1 average start....nothing really consistent.

We havent seen Henrik, for the most part, rip off 20-30 games of God-like performance. He's done it in the past...I hope he's saving his best for last.

I mean, look at Henrik VS Talbot...

this is the first year since when where both Henriks GAA and SV% have been worse than his backups?

I just did the research, last time this happened was in 2007-2008, and then when Vally and Henriks played, they had pretty close numbers. This year Henrik is being blown away by his backup.

Part of it can be attributed to the natural "tightening of the belt" that a team tends to do with the backup in net. But part of it is just that, flat out, Talbot has played well, and Henrik hasn't.

I'll say this one more time to be perfectly clear. In my lifetime no player outside of maybe Brian Leetch deserve the benefit of the doubt/deserves a pass/deserves the unwaivering belief that he will rebound down the stretch.

But, to hold pretty much any player more accountable to this years "Failures" more than Henrik Lundqvist, to me, seems to be an unfair passing of the buck.

Nash makes an easy target because of A. his salary, B. his relative newness to the organization, and C. the fact that he wasnt drafted by the Rangers.

Henrik gets a pass because of who he WAS and what he DID for the organization. But, you gotta call it like it is. If Henrik was better/like he was the previous few years, IMHO we'd be running away with the #2 seed in the Metro division.

 

[True Blue]

I think Nash gets a lot of undeserved hate.

The Rangers arent losing because of Rick Nash on most nights.

Nash is not being a difference maker. He was supposed to be the crown jewel. Has he made a difference since he arrived?

 

[True Blue]

When is Sather going to acquire a 30-goal scorer on the cheap? Wheres his Goligoski for Neal trade?

Maybe asking for such a player to be developed in essentially 15 years is not unrealistic?

He tried through the draft. The 2012 team were mostly Rangers draftees. None were consistent goal scorers.

And that team had the most amount of success.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

He tried through the draft. The 2012 team were mostly Rangers draftees. None were consistent goal scorers.

He tried via free agency. Gaborik is the lone success story.


He tried via trade. As of now, Nash has been a consistent goal scorer, but at a Ranger pace.

When is Sather going to acquire a 30-goal scorer on the cheap? Wheres his Goligoski for Neal trade?

Sather lost site of what made the '11-12 team a good one and went after a silver bullet to quell the goal scoring issues. Nash's 30+ goals a season helps that department, but his arrival also opened up holes in other areas where the team was strong. Its a vicious type of cycle that has embodied his time as GM.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

1 more thing about Henrik. I know a lot of people talk about the quality of chances we give up now vs last year, and im not going ot deny that the slot does seem very dangerous for us now vs last time around. However, I think that people are completely glossing over this one pretty simple fact.

Last year, and really for his entire career here, Henrik Lundqvist was the best player on the ice for the vast majority of his starts. He would quite often win us games we didnt deserve to win. We'd be outchanced, outshot, out everythinged and he'd win us the game 3-2.

The 6 goalie system or whateve ryou want to call it constantly led to deflection chances, goalmouth scrambles, etc. It's not leading to as many of those now, instead we have movement and coverage issues that we didnt have before.

However I think most of us agree that the team we have this year, has outplayed the opposition on most night significantly more than they have in past years. Theyve lost these games due to a combination of Henrik playing poorly, and the offense being inadequate at finishing chances/opposition goalies playing well.

To me, the eyeball test is failed for Henrik this year (By and large). At times he's looked like his old self, and at times he looks lost out there.

Before Henrik would have like 1 bad month and then right the ship..but this year it seems like its been since the start of the season....1 bad start, 1 good start, 1 average start....nothing really consistent.

We havent seen Henrik, for the most part, rip off 20-30 games of God-like performance. He's done it in the past...I hope he's saving his best for last.

I mean, look at Henrik VS Talbot...

this is the first year since when where both Henriks GAA and SV% have been worse than his backups?

I just did the research, last time this happened was in 2007-2008, and then when Vally and Henriks played, they had pretty close numbers. This year Henrik is being blown away by his backup.

Part of it can be attributed to the natural "tightening of the belt" that a team tends to do with the backup in net. But part of it is just that, flat out, Talbot has played well, and Henrik hasn't.

I'll say this one more time to be perfectly clear. In my lifetime no player outside of maybe Brian Leetch deserve the benefit of the doubt/deserves a pass/deserves the unwaivering belief that he will rebound down the stretch.

But, to hold pretty much any player more accountable to this years "Failures" more than Henrik Lundqvist, to me, seems to be an unfair passing of the buck.

Nash makes an easy target because of A. his salary, B. his relative newness to the organization, and C. the fact that he wasnt drafted by the Rangers.

Henrik gets a pass because of who he WAS and what he DID for the organization. But, you gotta call it like it is. If Henrik was better/like he was the previous few years, IMHO we'd be running away with the #2 seed in the Metro division.

The Rangers have had the puck more and have generally had more shots.

I wouldnt necessarily say that is "outplaying" your opponent, especially when they are the ones who wind up with the better scoring chances.

 

[Bluenote13]

Fatherhood, system change, Olympic experience - no set structure, that makes a King weaker when he's used to holding it all together.

 

[Inferno]

Nash is not being a difference maker. He was supposed to be the crown jewel. Has he made a difference since he arrived?

what exactly does "difference maker" mean?

He's leading the team in goals scored...so yea, he's a difference maker...without him we'd have 20ish fewer goals scored on an offensively inept team as it is.

He's scored the most GWG on the team, so without him we'd probably lose even more games than we already have.

is he a difference maker? well, with that many GWG and with us tenuously holding on to a playoff spot. id say absolutely hes been a difference maker.

i think if you want all around players who make an impact even when you arent scoring, then you should also be ok with giving Ryan Callahan a 6x6 mil contract like he was asking for...he makes a difference when he isnt scoring.

why isnt he worth that much money? because Goals>>>intangibles.

 

[Inferno]

The Rangers have had the puck more and have generally had more shots.

I wouldnt necessarily say that is "outplaying" your opponent, especially when they are the ones who wind up with the better scoring chances.

i dont think its accurate at all that we're outchanced. I'd say on most nights we outchance the opposition, in many cases, BADLY outchance the opposition.

and we still lose.

i dont think this years teams record matches its play, just like i didnt think our 2012 teams record matched its level of play in the other direction.

 

[GAGLine]

It is the Ranger fan, make that NY fan way. Unless you are performing well in every single game, then get the F out of here.

The guy has 22 Goals and is blowing away the rest of the team. It's just amazing how bitter some fans can be.

22 goals, and 12 assists, in 53 games. And no, not all of that is because his linemates can't finish. Rick Nash is a one man band. That's how he plays.

 

[stan the caddy]

Sather lost site of what made the '11-12 team a good one and went after a silver bullet to quell the goal scoring issues. Nash's 30+ goals a season helps that department, but his arrival also opened up holes in other areas where the team was strong. Its a vicious type of cycle that has embodied his time as GM.

The 11-12 team had a big time offensive player and his play fell off a cliff since. People pretend like if we hadn't made the Nash trade we'd be in the same spoto as before, it's bs. Undoing the Nash trade doesn't give you a healthy Gaborik.

 

[OverTheCap]

Nash needs to put his money where his mouth his. Multiple times he's talked about how he needs to play on the inside more but he just isn't doing it:

“You’re trying to say I’ve been spending too much time on the outside, and I have,†he said. “Sometimes in the big picture you think that you’re effective on the outside, but I have to get to the inside and I know that.

“I know what I need to do here.â€

http://nypost.com/2014/01/07/rangers-need-olympian-nash-to-be-elite-down-stretch/

“When you get to this point of the season, it’s more about work ethic than talent,†Nash told The Post. “When I look at my shifts, the difference between when I’m scoring and not scoring is probably the time I spend on the inside.

“It’s not like I don’t want to, but I have to do a better job of getting to the inside.â€

http://nypost.com/2014/03/17/for-blueshirts-its-as-if-nash-never-arrived/

And, yes, I realize that the concussions may be a factor. But it didn't appear to bothering him when he had that hot stretch in January and bulldozed his way to the net to score the game winner against Dallas. He has the capability to play that way more often, he just chooses not to.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

i dont think its accurate at all that we're outchanced. I'd say on most nights we outchance the opposition, in many cases, BADLY outchance the opposition.

and we still lose.

i dont think this years teams record matches its play, just like i didnt think our 2012 teams record matched its level of play in the other direction.

How are you quantifying chances? Shots? Because I see a lot of shots coming from non-prime scoring areas, then Im seeing the team come the other way either on an odd-man rush or taking advantage of massive breakdowns in the slot. I'd gladly give up the 3 ****** shots the Rangers put on net for a shot 10 feet out in the middle of the slot.

Part of the problem, also, is half this team isn't even willing to venture into that tough area of the ice (an area that the Rangers shoddy and inconsistent man to man defense make easier for opponents)

 

[chosen]

To me, it is difficult to find much fault with Hank when our #1 line of Nash-Stepan-Kreider may be as bad as any #1 line in the game.