What's Wrong On Broadway?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    What's Wrong On Broadway?

    Interesting article on NHL.com regarding the free fall in the standings taken by the NYR's. It's still too early to us here at the forum to get into "I told you so's" but it apparently isn't too early for NHL.com to say it. I actually clearly remember reading here that Nash was worth any and all costs because he's a "rock star". I also remember being mocked for even suggesting the trade was better for the BJ's than it was for NY. It seems most fans in the Big Apple wish that Dubinsky was never let go and they lament the loss of depth brought on by the trade overall. Rick Nash is a great hockey player but I think most NY fans preferred winning.  Enjoy!

    http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=660720&navid=DL|NHL|home

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from 50belowzero. Show 50belowzero's posts

    Re: What's Wrong On Broadway?

    Although i take a somewhat gleeful gander at Torts squirming and scowling behind the Rags bench every time they are losing i sometimes wonder what Sather was thinking when he figured they needed Nash. While i wouldn't blame Nash for the Rags troubles, he's actually played well when not injured, i didn't think he was necessary for the Rangers to take the next step. They made it to the Eastern conference final with the team they had and a little tweaking might have been in order but thats about it.

       The Brad Richards conundrum(what happened to him this year?) isn't helping and with Gaborik's streaky play the Rags supposed improved offence is sputtering to say the least. Dubinsky & Prust are definitely missed and thats why i'm glad PC has stuck with the same core with the B's.Sometimes you don't mess with success and the Rangers were having success with what they had. Dreaming of the big "rockstar" to come in and solve a teams problems might sound great but it doesn't take into consideration team chemistry, balance and locker room harmony.

      Throw in injuries that occur to all teams during the season and now you see what no depth can do. 

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: What's Wrong On Broadway?

    In response to dezaruchi's comment:

    Interesting article on NHL.com regarding the free fall in the standings taken by the NYR's. It's still too early to us here at the forum to get into "I told you so's" but it apparently isn't too early for NHL.com to say it. I actually clearly remember reading here that Nash was worth any and all costs because he's a "rock star". I also remember being mocked for even suggesting the trade was better for the BJ's than it was for NY. It seems most fans in the Big Apple wish that Dubinsky was never let go and they lament the loss of depth brought on by the trade overall. Rick Nash is a great hockey player but I think most NY fans preferred winning.  Enjoy!

    http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=660720&navid=DL|NHL|home




    Yeah, time will still tell on this one, but I was in agreement that the Nash hype was a little over the top when this deal went down.  Nash has always been loaded with talent, but didn't seem to be fully engaged.  And when he's not fully engaged, he isn't that good.  I love that in the NHL, collecting a bunch of FA stars so rarely works.

    I think this season also becomes an indictment of Torts coaching too.  That's a whole other discussion, but I've found his style to be unsustainable over time -- he can gets teams to peak quickly with his rah-rah style but there seems to be a short window when this actually works.  Now the Rangers are at the point where key injuries happen every year from trying to block every shot and play more physical than anyone else, and Torts various tantrums have gone from motivational to a constant and pathetic background noise.  He can't get them to outwork anyone, and nobody is impressed when be browbeats his players and the media anymore.  He struts and frets his hour upon the stage and then is heard no more.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from 4everbruins. Show 4everbruins's posts

    Re: What's Wrong On Broadway?

    one common denominator: John Tortorella If his personality is anything like we see on tv, got to wonder what he's like in the dressing room? Time for a change in NY.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: What's Wrong On Broadway?

    In response to 4everbruins' comment:



    Yeah, I think that Torts' style of demanding that his players outwork the opposition every night worked a lot better with Dubinsky and Prust than it does with Gaborik, Nash, and Richards.  Getting talent to work hard is a challenge for every coach, and Torts' seems to failing in a big way this year.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: What's Wrong On Broadway?

    It's hard not to play dimestore shrink on this one.  As much as Nash is the lightning rod, you can't really blame him.  He started slow, but he's a point/game player now and he's +10, so there seems to have been some merit to the suggestion that, on a good team, he would score more than he did in Columbus.  We're talking 23 games, though, so who knows what happens over a full 82 next year or the next 20 games this year.  But as good as Nash is, it doesn't mean the move to acquire him was the right move.  It also might be one of those moves where it requires a few follow up moves that the Rangers didn't see or haven't been able to make.

    On the other side, it's not like Dubinsky and Anisimov have been burning out the goal light in Columbus.  The have 17 points combined.  Add Erixon's 4 assists and they still fall two points short of Nash.  But they're part of a Columbus team that is finding ways to win with a different identity than they had when Nash was there, and guys like Dubinsky and Erixon are more in keeping with that new identitiy.

    In NY, well - here comes the 5c headshrinking.  To take the punishment the Rangers did last year requires crazy commitment.  You have to believe you're part of something, that you're a vital cog and there are 20 guys who would all do the same painful thing - take a hit to make a play, take a puck in the cup, lose some chompers, play hurt, fight bigger guys.  It's hard to feel that you're part of something bigger when a) you're continually being singled out and told no, you're not part of it because you're not playing well enough to be part of it; and b) two guys who were key parts of "it" last year were dumped so the team could bring in a bigger than "it" goal-scorer.  Sort of undermines the mentality you need.  It would be the same delicate dance with the Bruins.  If, say, you brought in Iginla and he was too cool for school or traded Krejci for Perry.  Perry could be gold and still have an overall chilling effect on the roster.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: What's Wrong On Broadway?

    If anyone wants to say "I told you so", you can direct at me, i deserve it. Dez and Wheats called this one. I thought the addition of Nash on a team that plays low scoring games would put them over the top. I figured his power play totals alone would add 5 wins to them. more wrong i could not have been. Fletch nailed it on the head.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from 50belowzero. Show 50belowzero's posts

    Re: What's Wrong On Broadway?

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:

    It's hard not to play dimestore shrink on this one.  As much as Nash is the lightning rod, you can't really blame him.  He started slow, but he's a point/game player now and he's +10, so there seems to have been some merit to the suggestion that, on a good team, he would score more than he did in Columbus.  We're talking 23 games, though, so who knows what happens over a full 82 next year or the next 20 games this year.  But as good as Nash is, it doesn't mean the move to acquire him was the right move.  It also might be one of those moves where it requires a few follow up moves that the Rangers didn't see or haven't been able to make.

    On the other side, it's not like Dubinsky and Anisimov have been burning out the goal light in Columbus.  The have 17 points combined.  Add Erixon's 4 assists and they still fall two points short of Nash.  But they're part of a Columbus team that is finding ways to win with a different identity than they had when Nash was there, and guys like Dubinsky and Erixon are more in keeping with that new identitiy.

    In NY, well - here comes the 5c headshrinking.  To take the punishment the Rangers did last year requires crazy commitment.  You have to believe you're part of something, that you're a vital cog and there are 20 guys who would all do the same painful thing - take a hit to make a play, take a puck in the cup, lose some chompers, play hurt, fight bigger guys.  It's hard to feel that you're part of something bigger when a) you're continually being singled out and told no, you're not part of it because you're not playing well enough to be part of it; and b) two guys who were key parts of "it" last year were dumped so the team could bring in a bigger than "it" goal-scorer.  Sort of undermines the mentality you need.  It would be the same delicate dance with the Bruins.  If, say, you brought in Iginla and he was too cool for school or traded Krejci for Perry.  Perry could be gold and still have an overall chilling effect on the roster.



    Thats the thing, why was he needed? Just because he was available and the Rangers wanted him? I mean as a g.m and coach , you would think they would think these things through. I'm not suggesting that Nash is a dressing room problem but the dressing room seemed happy and balanced and quite successful the way it was. Alot of times i think management overthinks  whats really needed for a team, along the lines of ,Nash sounds way more sexy than Dubinsky.Its not so much the points that Dubinsky & Anisimov brought but the intangibles of which Nash's can be questioned. 

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from bogie6. Show bogie6's posts

    Re: What's Wrong On Broadway?

    It is hard to figure, particularly if you compare to Chicago or the Bruins where all the higher paid are still hard workers. In the first Bruins/Rangers game Nash got a taste of hard checks and semed to hesitate. He's big enough and skilled enough, and ,just maybe, his results are good enough, but the supporting cast isn't as good as the guys they sent to Columbus

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from seobrien. Show seobrien's posts

    Re: What's Wrong On Broadway?

    In response to 50belowzero's comment:



    Thats the thing, why was he needed? Just because he was available and the Rangers wanted him? I mean as a g.m and coach , you would think they would think these things through. I'm not suggesting that Nash is a dressing room problem but the dressing room seemed happy and balanced and quite successful the way it was. Alot of times i think management overthinks  whats really needed for a team, along the lines of ,Nash sounds way more sexy than Dubinsky.Its not so much the points that Dubinsky & Anisimov brought but the intangibles of which Nash's can be questioned. 




    I agree with you 50. I think it is one of the curses of being a New York team. They didn't just want to win, they wanted to win sexy. Giving up Prust, Anisimov, and Dubinsky is classic subtraction by addition. Quite simply, you need a hard working and capable bottom 6. Especially if your coach is the NHL equivalent of Rex Ryan.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from cowboys9. Show cowboys9's posts

    Re: What's Wrong On Broadway?

    Another reason is " King" Henrik has been less than stellar this year  as well..not putting up the numbers he did last year when he was stealing games.. He had like 8 shutouts last year, this year donuts... Combine that with underperforming seasons from Richards and Callahan and as Parcells used to say " you are what your record says you are "  

    I don't agree that Nash is the problem.. the guy is averaging a point a game doing his part..

     

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: What's Wrong On Broadway?

    See, I don't think this is a case of Nash's intangibles or him not being willing to work hard.  He seems to be trying as hard as anyone on that team - more than I saw in Columbus for sure.  It's more that they sent the wrong message by going out and getting any one guy who is perceived to be bigger than the team.  Dubinsky was that glue guy.  Anisimov may not have been so much a glue guy, but he was a useful complimentary piece - just a part of the puzzle.  And again, it's not that the Rangers miss their play on the ice as much as the players have lost faith that the team comes first in the eyes of the decision-makers.  It's made worse by Richards and Nash not having much chemistry, and Gaborik getting caught up in it too.  How else to explain that their scoring woes are all through the lineup?  They are getting even less depth scoring than they did last year.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: What's Wrong On Broadway?

    In response to kelvana33's comment:

     

    If anyone wants to say "I told you so", you can direct at me, i deserve it. Dez and Wheats called this one. I thought the addition of Nash on a team that plays low scoring games would put them over the top. I figured his power play totals alone would add 5 wins to them. more wrong i could not have been. Fletch nailed it on the head.

     




    I could've seen you being right with the PP angle Kel so we were both off on that. Their PP is 3 for their last 35. It's hard to believe.

     

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: What's Wrong On Broadway?

    In response to kelvana33's comment:

    If anyone wants to say "I told you so", you can direct at me, i deserve it. Dez and Wheats called this one. I thought the addition of Nash on a team that plays low scoring games would put them over the top. I figured his power play totals alone would add 5 wins to them. more wrong i could not have been. Fletch nailed it on the head.




    I had him picked for the Rocket, kel, with the Rangers getting second in the conference. While I never wanted the Bruins to get him, I did think he'd light it up in NYC, so I should be doing a mea culpa too.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: What's Wrong On Broadway?

    http://www.nhl.com/ice/teamstats.htm?fetchKey=20132ALLSAAAll&sort=avgGoalsPerGame&viewName=goalsFor

    Scroll to the bottom. 2.33 GF/G. Anisimov and Dubinsky gave the Rangers depth and balance, now they are gone. Also your offensive ice hogs aren't producing. I love watching this mess!

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: What's Wrong On Broadway?

    In response to SanDogBrewin's comment:

     

    http://www.nhl.com/ice/teamstats.htm?fetchKey=20132ALLSAAAll&sort=avgGoalsPerGame&viewName=goalsFor

    Scroll to the bottom. 2.33 GF/G. Anisimov and Dubinsky gave the Rangers depth and balance, now they are gone. Also your offensive ice hogs aren't producing. I love watching this mess!

     




    Me too San. I can't believe how many posters felt that Nash was worth blowing up a winning roster for. Oh well.

     

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: What's Wrong On Broadway?

    10 minutes in against the Canes and it's still 0-0 but the Rangers have only managed 2 shots on goal so far.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: What's Wrong On Broadway?

    1-0 for the Canes after the 1st. NYR manage 6 shots on goal. Pathetic showing so far at home.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from islamorada. Show islamorada's posts

    Re: What's Wrong On Broadway?

    The key to the Bs team plan going back to the advent of PC then CJ is to pick up key players and build around those players.  Kovy in NJ was a failure at first, but that changed.  Nash in NYC is much the same; it will take time for the team to adjust not to Nash but those many traded.  To wit on the thread, just maybe blocking shots all the time hurts!  

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from xdrive. Show xdrive's posts

    Re: What's Wrong On Broadway?

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:

    In response to 4everbruins' comment:

     

    one common denominator: John Tortorella If his personality is anything like we see on tv, got to wonder what he's like in the dressing room? Time for a change in NY.

     



    Yeah, I think that Torts' style of demanding that his players outwork the opposition every night worked a lot better with Dubinsky and Prust than it does with Gaborik, Nash, and Richards.  Getting talent to work hard is a challenge for every coach, and Torts' seems to failing in a big way this year.

     




    DING!!! superstar players like those 3 dont want to put their face in front of a slapshot and play a disciplined style

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share