Not quite sure that the Rangers keep Richards on the leftside when Hags comes back. Maybe they do, but I also think that may have been a short term solution made necessary by the fact that Hagelin was out, and Kreider (who I assume they were counting on to be a Top 6 left winger) didn't make the team.
- Pete V

I remember late in the 11-12 campaign Jimbo saying this is the time to capitalize and try and win a cup because of all the injuries in the Pens and Bruins lineup, that we needed to go for it all and do something at the trade deadline cus he didnt think a shot like this would happen again, that statement is holding truer and truer by the day

I remember late in the 11-12 campaign Jimbo saying this is the time to capitalize and try and win a cup because of all the injuries in the Pens and Bruins lineup, that we needed to go for it all and do something at the trade deadline cus he didnt think a shot like this would happen again, that statement is holding truer and truer by the day
- WayneY

I agree, you need to take your shot when you have it, because there is no guarantee, especially with all the parity in the league, that it will come again. At the end of the day, the Rangers had a 6th seed and an 8th seed in their way of winning the Stanley Cup, and it sucks that they didn't capitalize on that opportunity. But, dems the breaks!

And, I realize that the Kings were obviously playing better than your typical 8th seed, but still.

I remember late in the 11-12 campaign Jimbo saying this is the time to capitalize and try and win a cup because of all the injuries in the Pens and Bruins lineup, that we needed to go for it all and do something at the trade deadline cus he didnt think a shot like this would happen again, that statement is holding truer and truer by the day
- WayneY

yep, was so pissed we didn't add some more offensive help at that deadline.

seasons like 2011-12 don't happen too often

I agree, you need to take your shot when you have it, because there is no guarantee, especially with all the parity in the league, that it will come again. At the end of the day, the Rangers had a 6th seed and an 8th seed in their way of winning the Stanley Cup, and it sucks that they didn't capitalize on that opportunity. But, dems the breaks!

And, I realize that the Kings were obviously playing better than your typical 8th seed, but still.
- Pete V

That's the thing. You wouldn't have got past that eighth seed. They were playing lights out. Nobody was beating that team.

On paper, I still don't think the team is too far off. Coming into the season, I think almost everyone would agree that they were exceptionally strong in net, and had one of the best defensive cores in the league. Down the middle of the ice, Stepan, Brassard, Richards and Boyle/Moore is strong unit at the pivot. Even on the right side, they are pretty strong with Nash and Callahan manning the wings on the Top 2 lines. The left side is where they can use some significant help, IMO.
- Pete V

Up the middle, they are slow and soft. Stepan is solid, when he gets his game back, Boyle and Moore look abysmal, Richards looks better on the wing and Brassard's face should be on the back of a milk carton.

Not nearly enough finishers on the wing eiher; even when fully healthy and everyone is playing to their fullest potential.

The defense should be better than what they have shown and so should Lundqvist; sheerly based on previous solid play in both departments.

But, this offense struggles too damn hard to score three or, heaven forbid, four goals a game. I think they will get their stuff together enough to qualify for the playoffs but, unless the forward units change from their current state, we should expect the same playoff results.

Up the middle, they are slow and soft. Stepan is solid, when he gets his game back, Boyle and Moore look abysmal, Richards looks better on the wing and Brassard's face should be on the back of a milk carton.

Not nearly enough finishers on the wing eiher; even when fully healthy and everyone is playing to their fullest potential.

The defense should be better than what they have shown and so should Lundqvist; sheerly based on previous solid play in both departments.

But, this offense struggles too damn hard to score three or, heaven forbid, four goals a game. I think they will get their stuff together enough to qualify for the playoffs but, unless the forward units change from their current state, we should expect the same playoff results.
- MidnightMarauder

Playoff mentions now? Really? Let's get past game six, can we?

Up the middle, they are slow and soft. Stepan is solid, when he gets his game back, Boyle and Moore look abysmal, Richards looks better on the wing and Brassard's face should be on the back of a milk carton.

Not nearly enough finishers on the wing eiher; even when fully healthy and everyone is playing to their fullest potential.

The defense should be better than what they have shown and so should Lundqvist; sheerly based on previous solid play in both departments.

But, this offense struggles too damn hard to score three or, heaven forbid, four goals a game. I think they will get their stuff together enough to qualify for the playoffs but, unless the forward units change from their current state, we should expect the same playoff results.
- MidnightMarauder

I have a feeling all the Hags doubters will look stupid in a few games. We miss his speed in the lineup and I think he's more critical to the Rangers than people want to realize.

How about 2 points. Thank You.

I have a feeling all the Hags doubters will look stupid in a few games. We miss his speed in the lineup and I think he's more critical to the Rangers than people want to realize.
- mrhattrick27

I agree with that. I think he will really help, because they need his speed and energy. With that said, I still think they need more finish, because as much as love Hags, I think he will be miscast if the Rangers were expecting big goal numbers from him.

IMO, the Rangers need to make a deal to address the goal scoring issues, especially if they can't count on Kreider.

I agree with that. I think he will really help, because they need his speed and energy. With that said, I still think they need more finish, because as much as love Hags, I think he will be miscast if the Rangers were expecting big goal numbers from him.

IMO, the Rangers need to make a deal to address the goal scoring issues, especially if they can't count on Kreider.
- Pete V

Agreed on that but I think Hags will make the other players better and should be in that Top 6 supporting role. He keeps proving he belongs there.

I'm hoping Kreider can become what we need him to be. Him, plus a healthy Nash and Hags and I think offensively things will look a lot different.

Of course that means the D and Hank are playing up to the level we expect.

Agreed on that but I think Hags will make the other players better and should be in that Top 6 supporting role. He keeps proving he belongs there.

I'm hoping Kreider can become what we need him to be. Him, plus a healthy Nash and Hags and I think offensively things will look a lot different.

Of course that means the D and Hank are playing up to the level we expect.
- mrhattrick27

I don't think the Rangers can really depend on Chris Kreider anymore. If he turns the corner and starts making an impact that is a great thing. But, can we depend on that? At this point, he really is your traditional prospect. He may make it. Or, he may bust out. But, I have seen nothing so far to suggest he is a sure thing, especially when he couldn't make a team that badly needs goal scoring out of camp.

Put differently, if there is another option out there on the trading market, I think the Rangers should take it, even if it arguably blocks Kreider.

I don't think the Rangers can really depend on Chris Kreider anymore. If he turns the corner and starts making an impact that is a great thing. But, can we depend on that? At this point, he really is your traditional prospect. He may make it. Or, he may bust out. But, I have seen nothing so far to suggest he is a sure thing, especially when he couldn't make a team that badly needs goal scoring out of camp.

Put differently, if there is another option out there on the trading market, I think the Rangers should take it, even if it arguably blocks Kreider.
- Pete V

Yes, of course, but my point is there is that hole. And without a trade the Rangers ARE depending on him, or another rookie to step in and fill that hole. If they think they are fine they are kidding themselves. There is a hole there and without a move we are depending on a rookie to fill it.

EDIT: so my point is, if you can't make the move now, you need to give Kreider, yet another chance to assume that role. Having no trade and no rookie up means you aren't trying to fill that hole AT ALL.

Yes, of course, but my point is there is that hole. And without a trade the Rangers ARE depending on him, or another rookie to step in and fill that hole. If they think they are fine they are kidding themselves. There is a hole there and without a move we are depending on a rookie to fill it.

EDIT: so my point is, if you can't make the move now, you need to give Kreider, yet another chance to assume that role. Having no trade and no rookie up means you aren't trying to fill that hole AT ALL.
- mrhattrick27

I agree with you.

They really should make a solid run at Curtis Glencross. He could be a 25-30 goal scorer, he is locked in for the next two years at a very reasonable contract, and he also solves a toughness problem.

The problem is someone like Kreider would likely be the cost.

Edit: The Flames starting out 3-0-2 is also a complicating factor.

I agree with you.

They really should make a solid run at Curtis Glencross. He could be a 25-30 goal scorer, he is locked in for the next two years at a very reasonable contract, and he also solves a toughness problem.

The problem is someone like Kreider would likely be the cost.

Edit: The Flames starting out 3-0-2 is also a complicating factor.
- Pete V

I would like Glencross, think he'd be a solid addition and does have a reasonable salary as you said.

I agree with you.

They really should make a solid run at Curtis Glencross. He could be a 25-30 goal scorer, he is locked in for the next two years at a very reasonable contract, and he also solves a toughness problem.

The problem is someone like Kreider would likely be the cost.

Edit: The Flames starting out 3-0-2 is also a complicating factor.
- Pete V

Teams looking to deal with the Rangers are only interested in McDonagh, Miller, Callahan and maybe Del Zotto. So, in order to boost the anemic offense we have to be prepared to overpay.

Teams looking to deal with the Rangers are only interested in McDonagh, Miller, Callahan and maybe Del Zotto. So, in order to boost the anemic offense we have to be prepared to overpay.
- OLDSCHOOL#6

Which is why I am saying Kreider has to be given another shot. If that void were filled from within our team can be very good.

Which is why I am saying Kreider has to be given another shot. If that void were filled from within our team can be very good.
- mrhattrick27

At the same time, if Nash is unable to return it's not going to matter much.

At the same time, if Nash is unable to return it's not going to matter much.
- OLDSCHOOL#6

Well if that's your mentality then different argument, same result. Kreider and kids should be up rather than guys like Pyatt if we are gonna suck anyway

Well if that's your mentality then different argument, same result. Kreider and kids should be up rather than guys like Pyatt if we are gonna suck anyway
- mrhattrick27

That I agree with 100%. Sadly, the dysfunctional and delusional management does not, at least not yet. I mean how are they going to justify $300 seats if 1/2 of the Whale are wearing Ranger jerseys.

Larry Brooks ‏@NYP_Brooksie 42m

Disregard any report of #NYR interest in Bryzgalov. "No," Glen Sather told Post this AM after catching breath from laughing at question.

That I agree with 100%. Sadly, the dysfunctional and delusional management does not, at least not yet. I mean how are they going to justify $300 seats if 1/2 of the Whale are wearing Ranger jerseys.
- OLDSCHOOL#6

Again, look at the NY Jets. People are willing to get behind a young team that will have it struggles. They cannot get behind a team of Pyatts. Whether we like it or not these young players are the key to the Rangers success by either making an impact directly on the Rangers or being dealt for players that can make an impact.

Again, look at the NY Jets. People are willing to get behind a young team that will have it struggles. They cannot get behind a team of Pyatts. Whether we like it or not these young players are the key to the Rangers success by either making an impact directly on the Rangers or being dealt for players that can make an impact.
- mrhattrick27

It's all about making the playoffs for management. Two playoff games are better than none to them. It's all they really care about, and jerk that I and many are keep buying tickets.

I agree with you.

They really should make a solid run at Curtis Glencross. He could be a 25-30 goal scorer, he is locked in for the next two years at a very reasonable contract, and he also solves a toughness problem.

The problem is someone like Kreider would likely be the cost.

Edit: The Flames starting out 3-0-2 is also a complicating factor.
- Pete V

Problem with Glencross, and I like him as a player, is he isn't a "goal scorer" per se; he's a Ryan Callahan-type. But if I understand correctly it seems we need a pure goal scorer and that he is not.

Teams looking to deal with the Rangers are only interested in McDonagh, Miller, Callahan and maybe Del Zotto. So, in order to boost the anemic offense we have to be prepared to overpay.
- OLDSCHOOL#6

Not necessarily if we find a team in a similar situation as the Rangers find themselves in. A team off to a slow start that has plenty of talented offensive players but lacking on the back end. A change of scenery type trade where we send a D (MDZ?) for a F; two struggling young players getting a fresh opportunity.

Problem with Glencross, and I like him as a player, is he isn't a "goal scorer" per se; he's a Ryan Callahan-type. But if I understand correctly it seems we need a pure goal scorer and that he is not.
- gkmkiller

Kreider Miller plus for Vanek? Girardi and a second for Moulson? No way the second one happens for a variety of reasons but if teams weren't rivals I could see it as a possibility