« Crease Wars II: Attack of the Devil Clones | Main | Homestand on Shaky Footing »

February 23, 2007

Comments

Dubi- great review

totally agree

this is why i get frustrated (notice - i've been tame ! ! )

you're absolutely right

it's never the refs' fault why you lose a game but the Devils get away with everything under the sun.

what is going on here? can the league take action? can an independent group 'audit' these calls and non - calls. it's really getting scary. makes me want to take a sledgehammer to the refs.

Larry Brooks needs to shut up already.

i try not to complain about the refs because i think it's usually a waste of time, but i sat in front of a devils fan last night who couldn't believe the breaks his team was getting. that's gottta say something...

Great article Dubi,I will always 'read on'.I believe Jon was dead wrong,if the devs had to kill all penalties they commit,their offense would be reduced to shorthanded chances.What a ridiculus dive by Brodeur.

Sidney Crosby was 0-7 at one point this season, but still wanted part in the shootout and scored the game winning shootut goal about 2 and a half weeks ago (against Philly I think it was). That shows some stones. That shows leadership. That shows a kid who's confident that he has the ability to lead his team to a victory. Isn't that the kind of mentality a captain should have???

I don't really care about Jagr taking or not taking the SO. The Rangers blew a 2-0 lead and Renney will do nothing to change any members of the D.

Good teams like the devils find ways to win while bad teams such as the rangers always find ways to lose.

dubi-i agree with you 100% about jagr not participating in the SO. he knows how inept he is in SOs and breakaways (as has been proven time and again this season)and isn't the objective to win, ego aside?

the frustration with his overall play i think has more to do with all the complaints than anything else, and that's just a by-product of the system the rangers continue to deploy, and it becomes more evident with shanny out. the captain won't take the puck in the SO versus the captain taking the puck all the time during the game is i guess the real problem here, and not to contradict myself but it's been a season long issue that i have had a problem with, his play during the game, not in the SO.

he's had some games recently where he's looked better with the puck, not getting knocked off so easy and making better passes, but for the most part he's been such a huge liability. his passes have led to innumerable chances and/or goals for the other team (more i dare say than the pucks off our d-men's sticks or skates) and his over-handling of the puck has killed more chances to score than i care to remember. his teammates' constant desire to get him the puck as he continually calls for it is also detrimental to team play. and i know some of you are thinking how well it worked last year, but everything about our team last year surprised the league and, more importantly, jagr was healthy, at least until the olymfuk break. hockey is until someone tells me otherwise the epitome of a team game, and 66 i don't think is the ideal of a team player.

should we get rid of him? i think every scout in the league has seen the way he's been playing and i don't think he's a salable asset for that reason. hopefully shanny comes back not too soon from his concussion and we can get back to rolling the lines the way they were going in the wins over TB and the caps, but it might just be too late. it would be a major disappointment to miss the POs again. remembering those two wins and the way we've played against the better teams this year keeps gnawing at me that maybe we can do some damage if we can get in.

as an aside, i saw lou lam at the garden last night and he reminds me of a beady-eyed mole. i don't know if moles are beady-eyed, but that's what came to me as i was passing through the corridor to get to my seat.

The non penalty calls go both ways. I can't understand why the management doesn't admit that the Rangers do not score enough goals. The Rangers breakout plays and offensive break ins are a mess. These players are not coachable. They play their own styles. Sometimes it seems like the Rangers are a combination of misfits. Partly for lack of offensive ability and partly for detached playing styles. The Coach says there is a system. I don't see it. Do any of you?
The defense has nothing to do with the offense. The 3d and 4th lines have nothing to do with offense. The 3d and 4th lines can't hit the side of a barn with a puck. Why are we losing? That's why. In 1 goal games the CLUTCH players win it.

I used to think that anything Mario (66) wanted Mario got (and still does) but you can add Loulam to that phrase. Even the guys on the hdtv broadcast couldn't believe the call on JJ. I hate to say it but someday someone is going to really get hurt due to all of the frustration. I love Larry Brooks and his stand against Bettman but if JJ is not comfortible in the so then so be it. Hdtv also had an interview with Avery. Very edgy fellow that loves to take the NY attitude one step further. I hope he sticks around awhile.... Z

Sorry about the multiple posts.

Does Brooks even watch these games anymore, or does he just give a cursory glimpse of the highlights and then write his articles? To say Lundqvist gave up a bad goal to Rafalski is ludicrous... there isn't much a netminder can do when the puck is deflected halfway in like Rafalski's shot was. How about we call out Malik instead? Get your stick out of the way and let your goalie do his job.

And Brooks out to be embarassed about his column today. Shootout success is going to turn into a stat similar to what pinch hitting batting average is in baseball. There are some guys you just don't want coming off the bench cold in a big spot in the 9th inning, and then there are other guys who are superstars, but they thrive in that scenario. The shootout is probably the closest analogy in hockey.

Off the topic anybody seen Sabres Ottawa as much as i hate them both they got my respect they stoof up for each other and had a brawl even goalies into it.100 penalties minutes was called.The whole point for this comment is thst we the only team that got 3 players sticking up for each other.We shoudlve got Arson Carter.

Dubi Is there any update on Shanny

It doesn't matter that the Rangers didn't pick Parise; he would have been kept in Hartford until he was "ready"....

Goin back to me talkin bout sabret Ottawa game funny thing is that when Drury got hit(cheap shot) nobody got suspended or fined.When Orr hits Ovechhkin he gets 6 game suspension how is that fair

1. It seems to me the Rangers have done a very good job lately of shutting down the Gomez line. Most notably - stopping Gomez from having room to carry the puck through the neutral zone with speed. Thats a good thing, and I credit the coaching staff for educating the players in that regard.

2. It was obvious very early last night that the Parise-Zajac-Langebrunner line had a lot of jump early on, and that it was probably going to be a matter of until they made the Nylander-Prucha-Hossa line pay. I was at the game, so I didn't see it so clearly, but it looked to me like Prucha has Parise pretty well tied up. He still managed to get it right on the stick and in the net while falling down. Cant wait til 2014, when we see Hugh Jessiman do that...for Vancouver.

3. This game really did boil down to bounces. Sure, we could have gotten a call or two more in our favor, but like Dubi said - lately the bounces have gone the Devils way more than the Rangers. There were a number of chances the Rangers had, right in the slot between the circles...Prucha had 2...Ortmeyer had about 40...Nylander...Cullen...that went wide or were blocked. Even forgetting the shootout bounces - if one or two of these chances go the NYR way, we would be hearing about how good an effort this game was...how it could be the turning point...blahblahblah.

4. I don't care if Jagr takes the shootout or not. Shootout specialists are all around the league (check out: http://jeays.net/shootout/shooters.htm), and there are tons of people who do well who will never be an all-star. The players spend lots of time at practice on the shootouts, so the coaching staff should have a good feel for who to put in the lineup.

5. The real issue is not the shootout players - its the shootout itself. If the shootout has to be a part of the game, I will keep arguing for at least a 10-minute 4 on 4 overtime period before the shootout begins. Teams should be given every opportunity to win the game before it goes to individuals. There is no reason teams can play an extra 5 minutes.

21 games left.

In their previous 21 games the Rangers went 10--10-1 for 21 pts.

They need 28 pts most likely in their next 21 games.

Two things about last night's frustrating half-loss:

1. The referee should have had the guts to call a penalty on Marty "hate-those-Rangers" Brodeur for unsportsmanlike conduct when he so obviously took a dive when running into Jagr outside his protected blue circle. Two nights earlier, of course, he didn't get penalized when first he initiated the brawl around his net by pushing Avery outside the blue circle and then, second, took yet another dive when Avery pushed back. And Avery gets the penalty!?! And last night Jagr got two minutes -- unbelievable!


2. Please, tell the D not to use their sticks to try to stop a shot when the goalie has it all covered! Malik's effort last night cost us the game. And, of course, Rafalski's goal on Tuesday also came off a deflection, on to the post and into the net. Yes, we are not getting the breaks. However,

I for one believe that we can still make the playoffs as long as we keep up the strong play of the past two weeks. We should get some breaks down the road as well, since they do have a tendency to even out in the long run. And as long as Henke continues to play exceptionally well in the net.

Ove W.

ANT, the only Shanny update I heard (I think) it said something about a Feb 23 or 25 return?? Someone jump in and correct me if I misunderstood. My take is the fortunes of the season will be decided before he makes it back. If we are out of it, I say give him another month off and make sure he is A-OK.
I still remember Lindros in Philly with him being brought back too soon. A war of words broke out between Booby Clarke and the Lindros camp. That was the beginning of the end of his career in Philly. Not that anyone at MSG would force an issue but no sense in rushing him back.

I haven't heard of anything on Shanahan. Today is the day he was supposed to be re-evaluated. None of the reporters at practice today had any news on him. Feb 23 or 25 return are obviously not possible with him on IR -- what you probably heard was Feb 23 re-evaluation.

I wouldn't expect Shanahan back, period. Let's hope that he can return some time in March, or at least for the playoffs. But I think right now, mainly because of his age, he is in a career threatening position -- if he returns at all, even if it is not until next season, I will consider it good news for him. My fear is that he will be out the remainder of this season and will choose to retire thereafter rather than risk re-injury.

I don't agree with the Parise assessment. Our pick was Jessiman. We were looking for a power forward type player. He was ranked 20th by CSS and went at 12th. Parise was ranked 9th but was dropping fast, because of his size. If we were looking for a power forward, the guy was Ryan Gretslaf, ranked 5th overall by CSS and picked 19th by ANA. And, he came out of the WHL.

Thanks Dubi, maybe that is what I heard about Shanny, a reevaluation and not a return. I guess it is really more serious than we were first led to believe. I remember the initail reports saying he's OK, no damage yada, yada. Jeff Beukeboom and Pat Lafontaine should still be reminder of what can happen with a career.
Get well Shanny.

Boston drops Tampa, Rangers drop further to 12th. Take Sather out back, put a bullet in his ear and drop him into the 12th place hole they've dug.

Bring on the next guy...

Seeing how Dubi signs the checks, I should not disagree with his view that Parise was who the Rangers should have drafted instead of Jessiman.

However I will mainly because I was not a fan of Parise then and still am not even today. I will agree with Dubi that the selection of Jessiman was a poor choice by the Rangers as in my eyes, Jessiman took one strong freshman year and leapfrogged over so many players. His draft status was as I said built upon one year.

The Rangers at 12 in my book should have gone with Ryan Getzlaf (I wanted him then). Of course at that time I was very much pro-WHL and I believe Getzlaf would have been the better pick over even Parise. Their numbers are close enough today but the difference is that Getzlaf addressed the size issue.

The Rangers lacked back then a talented big forward and if you have followed the Ducks you would have seen that Getzlaf has clearly fit the bill. At 6'4 he towers over Parise and he plays a strong two way game which the Rangers badly needed.

I will gladly put Parise up against Getzlaf and watch Getzlaf wipe the floor with the little fella.

In 2004 I would have not taken Montoya but used that pick on Drew Stafford who I believe would have addressed the Ranger desire for a power forward.

In 2005, Staal was and remains a safer selection as my pick would have been Anze Kopitar who was stolen by the Kings with the pick just before the Rangers.

In the last draft, I still do not like the Sanguinetti pick as while he is a solid offensive weapon, his defense is going to take a ton of work just to be weak. I was rooting for Patrik Berglund who has been compared to a mini-Matts Sundin.

The other choice I would have made would have been goalie Leland Irving who is one of the best goalies in all of junior hockey.

Of course given how the Rangers are heading south I am already working on the Ranger's lottery pick.

Im a huuuuuge ranger fan, but im a big red wing fan as well, and when i read it here that shanny was signed that was a dream, the following year i kept sayin i wished NYR had shanny or zetterberg, it would suck so bad if shanny retired from this, especially since this guy is the absolute opposite of forsberg, and id hate it for shanny to regret signing here because of this, when DET is having just as good a season without him as they had with him, hopefully he can rebound from all this, if not then that will be more then a blow to the rangers but a big blow for hockey....

Jess

You should have a chat with Maloney & Slats 'cause they don't have a clue.

"If Jagr insisted on taking shootouts even though he fares poorly in them, people would question his ego -- if he lets better shootout players go ahead of him, he's a poor captain? Give me a break!"

Sorry, agree with you on most stuff, but that is a totally ridiculous statement. Maybe if he worked on them, and actually participated in the last six, he might get better at them!!! But no, his option is to just opt out. That's leadership baby. And Renney letting him decide--even more leadership. I can site numerous examples of coaches/players that would find the situation humiliating. It's too bad you don't, because I as a lifelong fan think it's a joke.

Maileman

Lifelong fan or not, face the facts. Jagr is a lousy one-on-one player. That simply isn't his game and never will be. He is what I call a user, not in the bad sense though. He uses the boards, he uses the other players, he skates to a position where he can get a screen set up. He is so strong on the puck that that he can get into those tight areas and still get off a very hard shot. How do you think he would do if he skated 15 feet out in front of the goalie, parallel to the goal line and launched a wrist shot? Please tell me what is wrong with a leader wanting his team to win by using the best, first? Remember, there is no "I" in "team".

In my view, the draft should always be about taking the best player available, with an eye toward stocking the system with prospects as the "tie-breaker". For instance, we have some decent goaltending in our system right now, so next year, if the best options were between a skater and a goalie, I would probably go with the skater. Sometimes the best player available will be a power forward. Sometimes that player will be a skill playmaker. Sometimes it will be a stay-at-home defensemen. You get my point. Its almost impossible to suggest the Jessiman pick was a good one, not only in hind sight, but also in light of the people that were still available when he was picked. Getlzaf...Parise...Bernier...Kesler...Richards...Seabrook. These were, if I remember correctly, all rated above or near Jessiman.

And mark my words - Zach Parise will be an all-star in this league. His obvious skill, his obvious work-ethic, and his being tutored in the Devils system - something extremely surprising would have to change for him not to be, at worst, a 75-point scorer in this league for a long time.

Bill well said.I dont remember since when trying to help a team became a bad thing.The sad part about you fans who wrote bad things bout Jags u wouldve been same people who wouldve been saying why is he so selffish why didnt eh take himself out blah blah blah if he wouldve put himself in a top 3 and didnt score so please stop with this whining already. The one thing that i learned about a lot of fans on this website is that u just live to complain.Eveybvody hate Jags right now for some reason dont u ever forget hes one of the main reasons we finally seen a playoff game with Rangers in it.So please think before u decide to rip on one of the players esspecially the one that made this team a cup contenders.

Jags did show his leadership and heart when he decided to play game 3 of the playffs knwoing that 1 hit will get him seriously injured.

"esspecially the one that made this team a cup contenders."

Did I miss something? When did this team become a Cup contender? I think you have to be in the playoffs and win a playoff game to qualify for that. That was last done in 1997,

Happy 10th Anniversary.

Is Sather dead yet?

We were cup contenders and then we lost Jags so SHHHH

Matty

I have felt that the Rangers have used PR purposes to decide who they take with their first round picks over the last few years instead of going with a smarter selection.

As I posted who I would have taken had I had the choice the truth is only Staal in my eyes is a legit NHLer who will have a long term future.

Montoya I see as a backup not a starter, Jessiman while he is finally working hard at developing remains very suspect and Sanguinetti is even worse on defense than Tom Poti and is going to need a ton of work.

Funny thing though is once the Rangers get away from the first round they have actually made some excellent picks.

The 2005 class has the makings of being perhaps the best ever in Ranger's history. Sauer is very close to Staal (perhaps even better defensively), Dupont as I wrote last night is Messier/Graves on the ice, Pyatt is quietly the best two way prospect who is getting better with every season, Ryan Russell is so special as he is Prucha sized but Hollweg tough.

Even Koverko and Flatt could develop as they are projects but Flatt is my choice to protect my teammates. Greg Beller is playing Yale and he is HUGE size wise

Jess, If they generally stink at the first round picks, then they should just go with the highest rated player when their pick comes up, instead of trying to "finesse" a project, like they did with Jessiman. I suspect that Jessiman was more likely to still be around when their second pick came up than to have been selected by anyone in the first round.

You are right though, they have had more success with their late rounds than with the early ones. That would be the time to play hunches with prospects, not the first pick out of the box... maybe they just try too hard to hit a homer, and all too frequently strike out.

The comments to this entry are closed.