YesIAm
- 60 comments
- 137 likes given
- 20 likes received
Bio not provided
You know what's really sad? That game on the 26th is on the same day as the PRO BOWL. Now we're going to have to listen to jokes about how the Pro Bowl had 5 times as many viewers as the Rangers outdoor game.
This is stupid. I went to the game in Philly and it was PERFECT. The NHL's "super bowl" or "Daytona 500" or "Masters".. Whatever event you want to compare it to. It was a BIG event, with many other events focused around it. Most watched NHL games outside of the Stanley Cup Final. It looks great, it's fun to watch on TV but the atmosphere and experience was amazing in person at the ballpark.
Having 6 of them will change a lot of that. Yeah sure, it will be great to watch all of them for hockey fans, but eventually it will get old. Especially for "casual" fans and even for hardcore hockey fans. The Caps/Pens WC was terrible, as far as hockey goes, but it was fun to watch. If there are 6 of them every year, people will turn it off if the game is boring.
I was thinking they should do something like 3 in 1 day, at most. Have a 1pm game, a 4 or 4:30 game. And one at night, at 8. All on New Years Day. That would be awesome, but stretching out 6 games over 6 different days is stupid. Imagine a New Years Day with Rangers vs. Devils or Islanders at Yankee Stadium @ 1pm. Bruins/Canadiens in Montreal @ 4:30pm. Then Penguins/Flyers at Penn State at 8pm. 3 of the best rivalries in the NHL right now, all in one day. That would be fun, but they couldn't even do that. They dilute the great event and do it even do it the right way.
We'll see. Does he want to stay in NY, or does he care about money? If the answer is money, some team will pay him over $4 Million a year. But if he likes it in NY, then I can see him staying he for his current contract (I believe he makes around $3.5 Million)
Should be AT LEAST 3 games. Just a dumb fucking play. No reason for it. But I'll guess he only gets 1. Should be 3 though.
While these are great numbers, and it's nice that they're improving, the Pittsburgh Penguins are still averaging more viewers than the Rangers. Not many more (They average almost a 15.0 in Pitt, NYR are a 1.95 in NY) And the NY-area has about 6 times as many tv-homes as the Pittsburgh area, and Pittsburgh still manages to attract more viewers. Just think about that, 15 PERCENT of the Pittsburgh area watches EVERY Penguins regular season game. The Rangers couldn't even pull 15% of the NY area for playoff games. Obviously the NY area is MUCH bigger but there is still more work to be done if they want to expand the fanbase.
It doesn't matter. There's going to be a salary rollback, or NO NHL. You can tell Sather knows this. Otherwise, he would have never taken that ridiculous Nash contract.
I don't blame him. I wouldn't want to live in Manhattan. It's a fucking shithole. I would rather live in one of the other 4 boroughs (specifically Brooklyn where I live).. I'm sure he's not the only player that feels this way..
@gravey94 I disagree. He has to score at least 40 for it to be worth it. I also don't understand the on the cheap part. He is the 5th highest paid player in the league. We also traded 2 key players, our top defensive prospect, and a 1st round pick to get him. Not exactly cheap.
The thing is, we are stuck with Nash for 6 years @ $7.8M.. If he sucks, we won't be able to trade him. If he's decent, we'll still have problems. If he does what he should (40+ goals) then it doesn't matter since he'll be worth it. We saw how he handled this Columbus situation. He was their captain, demanded a traded, let everybody know about it, and only gave them a couple of teams he would accept a trade to. Is that the kind of player you want on your team?
Moving players like Dubinsky, Anisimov and Erixon would be much easier (If we had to make a trade).. We which might if there isn't much help in reducing salaries when the cap goes down. Plus they take up 3 spots instead of the 1 that Nash will occupy. So you have to average the salaries. The 1 player we got is $7.8M. The 3 players we traded our $7.825M but are only $2.6M per spot.
Only 35 goals? He better score more. At least 40-45 to make the contract worth it. The way everybody's talking about the trade, I'm expecting at least 45-50. He should score at least that many.
To Jesse's tweet, it's not that simple. Nash is signed for 6 more years. Dubi only 3, AA for only 1 and Erixon only 2. Not to mention Erixon would have probably started in CT so his cap hit doesn't matter. We are stuck with the $7.8M cap hit for the next 6 years no matter what (as of right now). If he can score 45-50 goals for the next 6 years than it's 100% worth it. But we'll have to wait and see if he can do that.
IMO, the trade is a wash. I don't think we got that much better, but it didn't really hurt the team (as far as play on the ice goes).. We should add some more goal scoring (If Nash returns to his former self) but we lose some of our key defensive forwards and core players. We also lose our top defensive prospect. So right now it looks like an even trade on the ice.
Of course, we need Nash to return to his 40 goal scoring days. Playing with some better players, he should be able to stretch it to 50. In 2011-2012, Nash had 30 goals and 29 assists (59 points).. A -19 and 306 shots (Only a 9.8 shooting%).. Dubinsky had 10 goals, 24 assists (34 points) +16.. Anisimov had 16 goals, 20 assists (36 points) +12.. Combined they had 26 goals, 44 assists (70 points)... Dubinsky and Anismov combined for 11 more points. They did that while playing in more defensive roles than Nash did. Both were 3rd line players for the most part of last season. They were also 2 of the Rangers best defensive forwards and penalty killers. Something Nash will not bring to the table. In 2010-2011, Nash had 32 goals and 34 assists (66 points) +2 with 305 shots (10.5 shooting %).. Dubinsky had 24 goals, 30 assists (54 points) -3 with 202 shots (11.5 shooting%).. Anisimov had 18 goals, 26 assists (44 points) +8.. Combined they had 42 goals, 56 assists (98 points).. 10 more goals, and 32 more points then Nash had. That's only a look at Dubinsky & Anisimov for Nash. We also traded our best defensive prospect & a 1st rd pick. If Nash can score 45-50 goals and return to his play from 3-4 years ago, then this a great trade (in terms of on ice production) but if he can't, then we traded to much for another overpaid, overrated star/
We can't really discuss if this trade hurts the Rangers in terms of the Cap until the new CBA is signed. Which is probably a long time from happening. Looks like they might not even play next season so who knows. But when it's finally signed, we'll see if this hurts the Rangers long term.
I wouldn't trade Stepan. Nash isn't as good as people think. His points and play have declined for 4 seasons now. He had 32 goals in 2010-11. Stepan and Dubinsky combined for 45 that year. I realize Dubinsky fell back last season, but he can easily score 20 again. Stepan improved last year and is only going to get better. Like I said, Nash's points and play have declined for 4 seasons in a row.
If Nash was a free agent, I wouldn't give him a 6 year, $7.8M per contract. I would pass. Now we have to take on that contract, and give up 1 or 2 of our young players? And a pick or 2? I'll pass. And I'm 99% sure Sather already passed. The media will continue to spew bullshit about it (because it's all they got), but if Glen wanted Nash as bad as they say he does, Nash would already be a Ranger.
I don't understand the Brashear/Asham connection. At that point Brashear was a bum. He couldn't fight and he had nothing to offer. AND we overpayed for him ($1.4 Mill a year for 2 years was stupid).. Not only that, but the hit on Blair Betts in the playoffs occurred 2 months earlier. He intentionally took Betts out. Then Torts decides he wants him so Glen gives him a stupid contract. That move made no sense for multiple reasons.
Asham is a vet who can still play. He has playoff experience and can still fight. He has never done anything to hurt the Rangers. Never injured one of our players. Never did anything crazy like that. At only $1 million, we didn't overpay. He will fill in nicely on the 4th line. A hole we had once Prust left. He is one of the best fighters in the league and will defend our players when necessary. Yes, we lost one of our top PK guys when Prust left, but Asham also adds a little more offense and is cheaper. In the end, it's a solid trade off for the Rangers.
I just don't understand the connection. Asham is a low risk move, that could definitely payoff. He will provide A LOT more for this team than Rupp will.
It's not that bad. If anything, it was an irrelevant day. Nothing big happened. But overall I think Sather did alright.
Asham is a replacement for Prust. The 2 players are very similar. Both fight, both can kill penalties, both hit and play 4th line roles. The only negative is Prust is more relaible on the PK, but the Rangers have plenty of players (Boyle, AA, Cally, Dubi, Stepan, Kreider) who can kill penalties. Arron adds a little more offense then Prust. And Prust is almost ALWAYS hurt. Prust was a solid player, but they way fans talk about him it's like we just lost Callahan. Asham will literally provide the exact same thing. He might not play on the PK very much but he'll add a little more offense. Asham only 2 years @ 1 million a year vs. Prust @ 4 years, 2.5 a year. That's called saving money. Smart move by Sather.
You say you would much rather have gotten Konopka. So would most. But how do you know they didn't try to sign him? Maybe they tried but he chose the Wild. We don't know.
Haley is an AHL signing. Wouldn't be surprised if he never played for the Rangers. Same for Newbury. But Newbury is a solid depth player to have. Had a great season with the Whale. Same with the 2 AHL players they lost. Those weren't important moves.
Re-signing Bickel (especially) at that price was a no-brainer. He'll do exactly what he did last year for the team. I was hoping they would bring Mitchell back but $1.1m a year is tooooo much.
I think it was a solid day. They didn't overpay to bring back Prust and they didn't overpay to bring in a 3rd or 4th liner. They made minors moves and found a replacement for Prust. There aren't many names this year and they chose to stay back and save their money.
@NHNYR88 @GLENsatherVSglennDANZIG It's not really stealing a chant. The Flyers copied the "You Can't Beat Us" chant, word for word. And used it against a team (the Penguins) that actually beat them twice. That's stealing a chant.
We took that lame "Alfie, Alfie" countdown chant and made it better. By changing it. I don't have a problem with it. It's better than screaming Potvin Sucks all game.
I think he'll win the Vezina, but this doesn't guarantee it. The Vezina is voted on by the GM's and the Hart is voted on by the PHW. So, you can't draw that conclusion from this. But I still think he'll win the Vezina. He has no chance at the Hart though. Malkin definitely won it.
I disagree with the Torresw/Neil comparisson. The Torres hit was worse. Also he's a "repeat offender" who has done this a lot over his career. I think Neil should get 3-5 games, not 10.
I think Richards has been one of the Rangers best players during this series. While guys like Gaborik and Stepan have been invisible (Stepan played a good game tonight)
2 really stupid penalties from Callahan tonight. Clean hit by Greening and he goes after him. Why? Let's say Greening drops the gloves, then we lose Cally for at least 5 minutes, for no reason. Instead he doesn't, and Cally continues to go after him. Just drop it. The goalie interference penalty was just as dumb. Captain can't take those penalties in a big game.
I don't think Anderson has outplayed Lundqvist. I think overall, Ottawa has outplayed the Rangers. Tonight, Anderson did what Lundqvist did during Game 3. The Rangers were the better team tonight, but anderson shut them down (The reverse of Game 3)
This team isn't in this position if Torts doesn't blow Game 2 with his stupid defensive trap in the 3rd period bullshit.
They could easily win the next 2 games. We'll see what happens.
I like most of it. But you're completely wrong about the GWG. That's all on Stralman. He gave Lundqvist no chance on that shot. Nice shot by Turris, but if Stralman isn't screening Hank, he stops it 100% of the time.
As a former defensemen, I wouldn't be able to sleep tonight if I did that to my goalie. He was stuck between blocking it and not blocking. He was tentative and never made his mind up. So it resulted in him slowly going down to block the shot. Turris saw that and waited for the right time to rip it through his legs, using Stralman as the perfect screen. Either go down and block the shot, or play the man. but he was stuck in between.
"Have to assume their offense would have been even better last night with him in the line-up."
Did you watch the game? Their offense was great. Ottawa dominated the whole game. Rangers only had a couple of chances in the 3rd (The goal and a couple of breakaways late. Ottawa was taking more chances @ that point).. The Rangers are lucky they have Lundqvist, he shut them down last night. Rangers played solid D once they realized they couldn't keep up with Ottawa. Boyle and Stralman both stepped up last night.
Alfredsson is a huge loss for Ottawa. I have no problem with Hagelin missing 3 games, if the NHL was consistent with their punishment. But they're not. Shaw got 3 today (Which also should've been less).. Let's see what Neal and Asham get (Should be at least 5 for each)...
But Hagelin is just as big of a loss. The 1st line was terrible last night. they were missing the piece that brought the line together. They were also nervous and shy about giving the puck to Kreider. If he's on the top line, those 2 guys need to get him involved. He showed that he can handle it.
Based on where the guy is standing, I doubt he was in Cally's sight line. He's focused in on the goalie and the net, and the guy is a couple of rows up. I doubt Cally even saw him. Still funny that the guy tried this.
@brian2686 Sure.. But I'd rather have Fedetenko in there. Feds scored the GWG in 03-04 in Game 7 of the Finals when Tampa won the Cup (With Torts).. Tampa won Game 7 2-1 (Feds had both goals).. He scored 12 goals in 22 games in those playoffs. Feds also won the Cup in 08-09 with the Penguins. He scored 7 goals and had 7 assists in 24 games. 2 cups and he was a key contributor on both teams. He's struggled this year but so has Rupp. Torts will definitely put Feds in over Rupp when the playoffs role around.
Feds was great last year. But he's been terrible this season. With that said, he supposedly has 8 goals and he can kill penalties so he should be in there. Mitchell is a solid player (And better then Feds) so I would keep him in there. The real waste is Rupp. The guy can barely play hockey, slow moving. Sometimes he can be effective on the forecheck but it's rare. AND at this point, he can barely fight. Prust still leads the league in fights, so it's not like that's changed.
Rupp will be even more useless when the playoffs role around. If you had Feds in over Rupp, this team could actually role 4 lines. Give some of the top players a rest. I know it's almost over, but they have 17 games in March. That's not easy and some of these guys can use a little rest. Role 4 lines so they're not playing 20+ minutes every night.
Yeah, for his first 11 or 12 games, EC was a -11 with 0 points, and everyone (including the coach and media) in Minnesota was ripping him. He was even a healthy scratch for a couple of games (On one of the worst teams in the league)..