No, not at all. All that hype last year.

I'm taking McD over Girardi 10/10 times.
- Blackstrom2

Ok. But that doesn't mean girardi is Overated. Your are clueless if you think he is

I get you point, but I think Girardi mean a great deal to the makeup of the team, even outside of what he does on the ice.
- Pete V

Think with new coach and as players mature you might see a changing of the guard. The married guys with kids Dan, Hank and whoever else might take a step back and players like McDonough might step into a leadership role.

Ok. But that doesn't mean girardi is Overated. Your are clueless if you think he is
- Slimtj100

He's a undrafted player making very little who is solid defensively and eats tons of minutes and does his job quietly. This is the definition of overrated? Ok.

Think with new coach and as players mature you might see a changing of the guard. The married guys with kids Dan, Hank and whoever else might take a step back and players like McDonough might step into a leadership role.
- Chris Erwin

I dont know about that.

I dont know about that.
- aecliptic

You have kids? Not being a smaetass but it's all consuming.

He's a undrafted player making very little who is solid defensively and eats tons of minutes and does his job quietly. This is the definition of overrated? Ok.
- GioRock

It's a ridiculous statement by that guy. Not sure what he's basing it on

You have kids? Not being a smaetass but it's all consuming.
- Chris Erwin

What does me having kids have to do with anything.

Hank isnt taking a step back until he raises the cup.

What does me having kids have to do with anything.

Hank isnt taking a step back until he raises the cup.
- aecliptic

I think it means, Because acleptic has kids hank will re-sign elsewhere

What does me having kids have to do with anything.

Hank isnt taking a step back until he raises the cup.
- aecliptic

I just meant a players off ice contributions might not be as much as a single guy. Off ice stuff was brought up. Which I always find ridiculous that we pretend to know. But regardless I think players like Hank and Dan married with young children not that their on ice or conditioning commitment will change I just think they have responsibilities that they didn't use to have.

If Richards doesn't get bought out, and the Rangers re-sign all of their RFAs, as Slats stated he intends to do, then that doesn't leave much space open in the Top 9 for forwards. You guys comfortable with a relatively status quo lineup? Something like this:

Kreider-Stepan-Nash
Hagelin-Brassard-Callahan
Zuccarello-Richards-Miller
Pyatt-Boyle-Dorsett

And if not, who goes to make room for another acquisition. Who would the Rangers trade in that group (assuming Zucc play for the Rangers or noone)?

If Richards doesn't get bought out, and the Rangers re-sign all of their RFAs, as Slats stated he intends to do, then that doesn't leave much space open in the Top 9 for forwards. You guys comfortable with a relatively status quo lineup. Something like this:

Kreider-Stepan-Nash
Hagelin-Brassard-Callahan
Zuccarello-Richards-Miller
Pyatt-Boyle-Dorsett

And if not, who goes to make room for another acquisition. Who would the Rangers trade in that group (assuming Zucc play for the Rangers or noone)?
- Pete V

You put it on paper like that Richards has to go. But IMO Boyle, Pyatt could be bumped by Asham. Also I would explore Hags value nice player but no Bryan Bickell

You put it on paper like that Richards has to go. But IMO Boyle, Pyatt could be bumped by Asham. Also I would explore Hags value nice player but no Bryan Bickell
- Chris Erwin

When I look at that lineup, I think the team needs someone else on the wing that can score. The Rangers got great value in the Gaborik trade, but now we're back to needing another Top 6 offensive threat on the wing.

If Richards doesn't get bought out, and the Rangers re-sign all of their RFAs, as Slats stated he intends to do, then that doesn't leave much space open in the Top 9 for forwards. You guys comfortable with a relatively status quo lineup. Something like this:

Kreider-Stepan-Nash
Hagelin-Brassard-Callahan
Zuccarello-Richards-Miller
Pyatt-Boyle-Dorsett

And if not, who goes to make room for another acquisition. Who would the Rangers trade in that group (assuming Zucc play for the Rangers or noone)?
- Pete V

I gotta be gota be honest, I don't feel very confident. That roster will get tattooed in the playoffs . It could however get 95 pts or a 4th or 5th seed. If your happy with that so be it.

I gotta be gota be honest, I don't feel very confident. That roster will get tattooed in the playoffs . It could however get 95 pts or a 4th or 5th seed. If your happy with that so be it.
- Slimtj100

It's not bad, but it needs more offense -- big tough winger that can score. That type of guy could also be available at the trade deadline, so you don't necessarily have to reach for it during the summer.

And if I had the choice, I would rather have Hagelin that Zucc. I want that speed forechecking presence.

When I look at that lineup, I think the team needs someone else on the wing that can score. The Rangers got great value in the Gaborik trade, but now we're back to needing another Top 6 offensive threat on the wing.
- Pete V

I know unless Kreider becomes that player. But don't like if's for a team poised to win now.

It's not bad, but it needs more offense -- big tough winger that can score. That type of guy could also be available at the trade deadline, so you don't necessarily have to reach for it during the summer.

And if I had the choice, I would rather have Hagelin that Zucc. I want that speed forechecking presence.
- Pete V

Said Hags because Zucc unsigned and Hags would have more value. Unless you want to trade Krieder for a now guy. Or go FA or buyout player route. Ryan Malone?

Said Hags because Zucc unsigned and Hags would have more value. Unless you want to trade Krieder for a now guy. Or go FA or buyout player route. Ryan Malone?
- Chris Erwin

As down as I have been on Kreider in the past, he needs to stay, unless the Rangers can get great value. He is a big fast kid, and the Rangers need the type of player he can be. When I look at that lineup, if I'm trying to make room for another guy in the Top 9, Zucc is the most logical candidate. May want to sign him to a couple year deal, get him under contract, and then he could value in season, rather than just not signing him as an RFA.

If Richards doesn't get bought out, and the Rangers re-sign all of their RFAs, as Slats stated he intends to do, then that doesn't leave much space open in the Top 9 for forwards. You guys comfortable with a relatively status quo lineup? Something like this:

Kreider-Stepan-Nash
Hagelin-Brassard-Callahan
Zuccarello-Richards-Miller
Pyatt-Boyle-Dorsett

And if not, who goes to make room for another acquisition. Who would the Rangers trade in that group (assuming Zucc play for the Rangers or noone)?
- Pete V

That line up is so soft... IMO Hagelin and Zucc's, although I like them, one - if not both - should be moved to put together a team that can smash faces and score goals.

He might be 33, but he still has some skill, if Franzen gets bought out, he should be a prime target for a 3 year deal.

Kreider, Stepan, Nash
Hagelin, Richards, Franzen
Clowe, Brassard, Callahan

The 4th line I wont really get into because we have too many of them.

As down as I have been on Kreider in the past, he needs to stay, unless the Rangers can get great value. He is a big fast kid, and the Rangers need the type of player he can be. When I look at that lineup, if I'm trying to make room for another guy in the Top 9, Zucc is the most logical candidate. May want to sign him to a couple year deal, get him under contract, and then he could value in season, rather than just not signing him as an RFA.
- Pete V

http://www.nyrangersblog....-multi-year-contract.html

It sounds like Zucc is gonna be here for a couple of more years. All of those people who want him gone are just gonna have to get used to it.

It's not bad, but it needs more offense -- big tough winger that can score. That type of guy could also be available at the trade deadline, so you don't necessarily have to reach for it during the summer.

And if I had the choice, I would rather have Hagelin that Zucc. I want that speed forechecking presence.
- Pete V

I know he's on the back end of his career, but Malone wouldn't be a bad fit. He'd be pretty cheap I imagine. 6'4 with a bit of nasty

Suppose its a toss between briere or Malone this summer? They choose briere I probably lose my mind

That line up is so soft... IMO Hagelin and Zucc's, although I like them, one - if not both - should be moved to put together a team that can smash faces and score goals.

He might be 33, but he still has some skill, if Franzen gets bought out, he should be a prime target for a 3 year deal.

Kreider, Stepan, Nash
Hagelin, Richards, Franzen
Clowe, Brassard, Callahan

The 4th line I wont really get into because we have too many of them.
- aecliptic

I agree 100%. Which has been my argument since the season ended.

Franzen isn't gonna be available tho

http://www.nyrangersblog.com/2013-articles/june/zuccarello-appears-set-to-return-on-multi-year-contract.html

It sounds like Zucc is gonna be here for a couple of more years. All of those people who want him gone are just gonna have to get used to it.
- TPC

I gained a great deal of respect for Zucc this year, and think that he is tough, creative little spark plug type player. Who goes in the Top 9 if the Rangers want to bring along Miller and Kreider, and keep Richards? Bit of a dilemma for the team, because I like all the individual players, but feel they need a bit more scoring punch. Brassard and Stepan are primarily set up men. Richards is as well. Zucc is also more of a passer than a sniper. I am concerned that they have too many of the same type players.

http://www.nyrangersblog.com/2013-articles/june/zuccarello-appears-set-to-return-on-multi-year-contract.html

It sounds like Zucc is gonna be here for a couple of more years. All of those people who want him gone are just gonna have to get used to it.
- TPC

Terrible move IMHO. Do see anyone like Zuccs on either Hawks or Bruins lineup?

I gained a great deal of respect for Zucc this year, and think that he is tough, creative little spark plug type player. Who goes in the Top 9 if the Rangers want to bring along Miller and Kreider, and keep Richards? Bit of a dilemma for the team, because I like all the individual players, but feel they need a bit more scoring punch. Brassard and Stepan are primarily set up men. Richards is as well. Zucc is also more of a passer than a sniper. I am concerned that they have too many of the same type players.
- Pete V

They definitely have too many of the same type of player. Outside of Nash, they dont really have a another guy who will help him shoulder the scoring.

I gained a great deal of respect for Zucc this year, and think that he is tough, creative little spark plug type player. Who goes in the Top 9 if the Rangers want to bring along Miller and Kreider, and keep Richards? Bit of a dilemma for the team, because I like all the individual players, but feel they need a bit more scoring punch. Brassard and Stepan are primarily set up men. Richards is as well. Zucc is also more of a passer than a sniper. I am concerned that they have too many of the same type players.
- Pete V

I think the skill guys will improve immensely under AV. I think the teams skill is probably the best attribute of the forwards. But they lack size and toughness, which I feel like a broken record about