Say my Name
Bio not provided
Trade MDZ for Potvin....that way the fans don't have to continue to chant that TWO people suck - you know, save their voices for the end of the year when they otherwise couldn't get out a "You suck!" during a critical game. ....may pay dividends.
4 hours, 12 minutes ago on Rangers/Islanders Talk Del Zotto?
@Betweentheworlds @shoot_the_goalie @josh930 lol
4 hours, 24 minutes ago on Rangers/Islanders Talk Del Zotto?
@gravey94 @Say my Name Oh wait.. I was just talking about the stats point you made, which DOES show that he has certainly been one of the best (in terms of consistency) over the past several years....meaning top 10 year in, year out - which, sure is hugely important. I just don't think he is deserving of number one pay (I give that to Rask) and certainly don't think he is worth the years.
Still...splitting hairs on the performance thing. We both agree he is great. That said...I can't state enough that the hole in his game so far as stick handling (and maybe now even leadership - but stick with stick handling for now) impacts the team negatively in a huge way that perhaps the stats don't/can't reflect.
Peace out you big Gravey Bastard! See you tomorrow night..
13 hours, 23 minutes ago on Lundqvist to Be Extended for 7 Years, $8+ Million Per
@GiveGartneraCup @MikeMagoo @GraigGiuliani Gartner...now your just making sense. That's gonna really throw the sensitive, irrational types here for a loop. HAHA.
13 hours, 36 minutes ago on Lundqvist to Be Extended for 7 Years, $8+ Million Per
@MikeMagoo @GiveGartneraCup @GraigGiuliani Just chiming in. Personally I can't stand that Brodeur is so damned good. As for the topic meandering....it is a fucking blog....that's what happens. Surprised we aren't talking about mercury fillings at this point. haha
15 hours, 9 minutes ago on Lundqvist to Be Extended for 7 Years, $8+ Million Per
@GiveGartneraCup @MikeMagoo @GraigGiuliani yeah...it's kinda tough for fans to put bias aside.
Brodeur is the man. No one is even close.
16 hours, 3 minutes ago on Lundqvist to Be Extended for 7 Years, $8+ Million Per
@IcyCup I like it as it was written. Made sense. LOL
17 hours, 19 minutes ago on Lundqvist to Be Extended for 7 Years, $8+ Million Per
@GiveGartneraCup @MikeMagoo @GraigGiuliani Totally. Two Devils I would take over any Ranger I have seen ever....Brodeur and Stevens. No brainer. Not even close.
17 hours, 35 minutes ago on Lundqvist to Be Extended for 7 Years, $8+ Million Per
@gravey94 @Say my Name HAHAHA! Ding ding ding...someone finally said it!! First one to see that. And I totally call bullshit on anyone who says they thought of that as well. Gravey brought it. Nice catch...Jesus what took you so long ;)
Yeah....I knew that as well, BUT wanted to throw it out there anyway. It makes my case and in a technical sense is true.
Yes, yes...Hank has been great and to FINALLY put it to bed I would say that I WOULD pay Hank THIS money for the last 7 years. I think it is foolish (ALL things considered - including GM's inability to work around it that I think we ALL agree upon) to do it for the next 7.
18 hours ago on Lundqvist to Be Extended for 7 Years, $8+ Million Per
@DubiLeetch @Say my Name lol...true. Hey...I love the guy so it is not that bad, I just don't like the deal and don't think Sather is good enough to work around it now. I'm pulling for him though.
Thanks for having a sense of humor. I can tell you play - not a wilting flower like some people get online. C'mon...it's a game, not life and death!
18 hours, 27 minutes ago on Lundqvist to Be Extended for 7 Years, $8+ Million Per
@DubiLeetch @Say my Name I gotta go. Let's agree to disagree. I love Hank and i'll be pulling for him. I love debating this though and like your take on it. Talk later!
22 hours, 4 minutes ago on Lundqvist to Be Extended for 7 Years, $8+ Million Per
@DubiLeetch @Say my Name Dubi, your pulling flyers out. a black swan analysis. I gave a range and the two most important stats for a goalie over time. You are illustrating a classic case of confirmation bias.
Or....in language you may understand, how can you even type while you have Hank's d*ck in your mouth?
LOL....TOTALLY kidding...just ribbing you. I've been in too many hockey locker rooms. haha
22 hours, 7 minutes ago on Lundqvist to Be Extended for 7 Years, $8+ Million Per
@DubiLeetch @Say my Name Ok Dubi, they mean nothing. lol.... and no, St.Louis was not the best player....but I THINK those stats mean he was the best scorer.
I think a better metric would be to lean on comments like "EVERY hockey expert" considers him to be the best. haha...areyasure??
You are funny.
22 hours, 12 minutes ago on Lundqvist to Be Extended for 7 Years, $8+ Million Per
@JMK8363 your lips to God's ears my friend
22 hours, 26 minutes ago on Lundqvist to Be Extended for 7 Years, $8+ Million Per
BTW - what is all this Top 3 crap?? Here is where he has stacked up with other goalies over the past 7 years: http://www.hockey-reference.com/leaders/
GAA Save %
2013 6th Not in Top 10
2012 5th 5th
2011 6th 4th
2010 8th 7th
2009 Not in Top 10 8th
2008 6th Not in Top 10
2007 8th 10th
And in the playoffs he has generally been not as good as his reg seasons.
And this year, well...we all know he isn't even close to the top in either.
And don't spout off some eye test BS....b/c the Rangers have largely played a VERY defensive system and save % is generally a pretty good way to judge a goalie - unless you want to discount players such as Roy, Hasek, Broduer, etc..
Hank is NOT top 3 and now he is being paid as top 3, if not 1.
I like Hank and think he is really good, but he has glaring holes in his game (saves high and stick handling) and NOT worth this in money or years. Get the facts Hank-ter-bators. :)
22 hours, 40 minutes ago on Lundqvist to Be Extended for 7 Years, $8+ Million Per
There is a reason the Rangers are the 24th out of 30 in all-time winning percentage.
Look, I love Hank and think he is a super goalie, but as Kevin says....this is not the way you build a winner. And for all of you that desperately want Hank to be the exception to the rule so far as aging athletes go, I get it, but to BET on it....silly. And even the craziest of you don't believe there will be NO decline in performance, right?
So...we have all seen what the Rangers are with Hank at his best and having more money to distribute to players in front of him. They have been bad to mediocre. Now we get to see what they will be with a Hank that will by definition be not as good (by SOME degree) every year and LESS money to distribute in front of him.
Ha...good plan. I'll be cheering them on, but I'll likely be still getting my fill for watching good hockey by watching other teams over the next few years.
23 hours, 7 minutes ago on Lundqvist to Be Extended for 7 Years, $8+ Million Per
@shoot_the_goalie @Say my Name Lol! So bloody true. Shame.
1 day, 1 hour ago on Nothing Going On With Callahan Extension
@shoot_the_goalie @Say my Name Both good points and yes....there is a function of my wanting to not sign Hank that stems directly from the holes in the team that a good GM may have been able to address even while paying Hank. So...true....some of my leaning toward not signing Hank is due to the GM's horrible calls in other areas. I would be much more comfortable signing Hank if they could trade their GM. He can't make it work with Hank not being paid like a top 3 goalie, I can only imagine how bad it will be when he would have to work around a new contract for Hank. You are right though....and it brings out an excellent point....a btter GM could probably pay Hank and still "field" a good team in front of him.
@gravey94 @Say my Name Winning the Cup has always been about depth and talent. No surprise. The problem that the cap brings is that one has to be incredibly careful with the "stars". Yes they do offer the talent side of the equation, but it is now IMPOSSIBLE to keep them beyond their most productive years without compromising the depth side of the equation. So now getting a star is like trying to buy a ripe banana, but with the downside being if you miss it can really hamper you for years.
So, yes, the first thing you do is remove your love for the stars and let them go early rather than late with FULL awareness that you will be losing a couple of years of high productivity. Thus, Hank, Staal, Cally, etc..have to go. BUT....you have had them for their prime AND if you have done your job right you have others (not necessarily at the same positions) that will be in their prime that are bargains. So you don't NEED a goalie that is Hank's replacement so long as you have a star of similar production at another position that contributes to the overall talent of the team at the same relative bargain that Hank was for the first half of his career.
i.e. The Red Sox lose Ellsbury a superstar CF, but they had him for 3 rings and backfill with what is hopefully Xander Boegarts at SS who will be the equivalent to the overall team. And they get him at a relative bargain and avoid the backside of a 160 mil contract that will likely hurt the Yanks down the line. And this is in a sport WITHOUT a cap.
As to what I would do, it goes merely to following the above recipe that excellent franchises like the Patriots, Red Sox, Steelers, Braves stick to.
And before you state that there still is a Brady to account for I am way ahead of you. Yes. That is true. It doesn't mean that you are devoid of stars, just that you have to be very wise in choosing the ones you roll the dice on to spend money on as they age. To me it is a no brainer that goalie is NOT one of them. First, b/c goalies tend to be affected by any decline due to age much quicker than other players (due to the exposure of the position) and perhaps more important b/c history shows that having a top 3 goalie is less important to winning a cup than a team with more depth and the "star" talent being in non-goalie positions.
So as to exactly what the Rangers hold do should they free up the room from not paying Hank...I have no specific moves, other than getting younger, tougher, faster and CHEAPER so that there is more depth. I only emphatically claim that in order for the Rangers to NOT be what they have largely been over the past 80 years they have to adopt the strategy that winning teams use.
The specific moves I leave to the GM...which is frightening considering he still seems to value players that would have thrived in the 80's. But first things first...lol
@Betweentheworlds @Say my Name Messier, Howe, Gretzky, Hull, Potvin, etc.......ALL got huge minutes despite declining skills, so that rationale is absurd.
And speculating about Hank being a superior athlete, blah, blah, blah....is irrelevant as we can not know.
The fact of the matter is that we both agree that a decline is inevitable, IS more important for the goalie position and IS a reason to avoid a long term deal.
The rest is superfluous.
1 day, 3 hours ago on Nothing Going On With Callahan Extension