Rangers Analysis: Rangers May Have Chased Matt Gilroy Off
by Nick Montemagno on Jun 29, 2011 6:00 AM EDT
in New York Rangers Analysis
Email
Print
This past weekend's news that the Rangers would not be qualifying restricted free agent defenseman Matt Gilroy at the necessary $2.3 million came as no surprise. GM Glen Sather's inference that the 26-year-old out of Bellmore, New York would likely test the market when free agency begins on Friday, on the other hand, was something new. With that, the chances of Gilroy's career on Broadway coming to an end this summer have risen despite the Blueshirts distinctly saying they would love to have the former Hobey Baker award winner back, just not at such a high price.
Gilroy's entry-level contract expired after his second season with the Rangers this year. Those two seasons, to put it simply, gave Gilroy quite the ride at the National Hockey League level. At times he felt wanted, at times he felt rejected, and right now he is stuck in the middle with tough decisions to make. There's no disputing that Gilroy has dropped on the Rangers' defensive depth chart since he entered the league out of Boston University in 2009. The acquisition of Tim Erixon from the Calgary Flames earlier in the month reinforced that and gave Gilroy his doubts.
The Rangers, specifically head coach John Tortorella, have had some qualms with Gilroy's game over the past two years. He lacked the physicality, the aggressiveness and the bite that they wanted to see from him on a nightly basis. That resulted in an assignment to the AHL in his rookie year and also much time spent in the press box rather than on the ice. Since the day Matt became a member of this team, he has been fighting for a roster spot and that fight never seems to come to an end.
This past season he saw both Michael Sauer and Ryan McDonagh come in as rookies and earn guaranteed spots ahead of him. There's been a lot of talk about Tim Erixon since he was brought here, so there's a possibility that he follows in Sauer and McDonagh's footsteps and does the same. Seeing this and knowing that he could potentially spend another year in the press box because of all the up-and-comers, Gilroy wants to see what he can get elsewhere on a team that he will have a much better chance at earning a permanent roster spot. It's not about the money with Matt, because there is no way even he thinks he is worth $2.3 million - it's more about the opportunity.
Continue reading after the jump....
As many of you know, I was always a fan of Gilroy and should make clear that I still am. I always felt that he had something to prove that we were not getting the chance to see, and part of that blame falls on the way in which he was managed here in New York. I think the coaching staff chipped away at Gilroy's confidence with the AHL assignment and continued to do so by regularly scratching him. Early on in his rookie year we saw what he was able to add offensively to the squad, but Tortorella didn't want that - he wanted Gilroy playing his style of defense, and the transition obviously was not a very smooth one, therefore there were consequences to face.
I think if Gilroy would have been granted more freedom at that early stage and wasn't pressured into transforming his game, we may have seen him blossom into the puck-moving defenseman that the Rangers are ironically in search of now. Their hope is that Michael Del Zotto fills that role, but that is a whole other discussion for another time.
You cannot blame Gilroy for wanting to test the waters of the open market because in many ways he wasn't given a fair chance while a member of the Rangers. His solid performance in the playoffs back in April instilled some hope in both sides, I think, but that wasn't enough convincing evidence for either. Gilroy doesn't want to be trapped in a situation where he won't be getting an opportunity to play, and that is very understandable.
If signing with another club gives Gilroy a greater opportunity, then I honestly believe he should go ahead and end his career as a Ranger and sign a contract elsewhere. Obviously I would love to see him back in red, white and blue, but I also want the best for the kid and unfortunately that isn't here in New York.
I just hope that the Rangers look back on Gilroy's time here and realize that they chased him away (if he ends up leaving), not the other way around, and do not make that mistake again with any of the other young prospects on their way up.
88 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Gilroy to the Isles
It makes too much sense for Gilroy to end up on the island. He will get playing time. He will not be expensive and his potential upside is good.
They just traded for Erhoff… if they get him signed, and with Streit coming back, they won’t have any room.
I see him somewhere like Buffalo.
The Matt Gilroy Experiment failed and it's over.. deal with it.
Don’t lament the possible departure of this disappointment. As an older rookie (believe he was 24 at the time) he was given two years to make believers out of Torts and company. He failed to do that. Did he get the quick hook from Torts at times, probably. But so did everyone else. Let’s not forget, two younger players outplayed him and displayed better all around games. Torts told the defense last year he wanted more offense from them, what did Gilroy do in response.. a whole lot of sprawling around in front of his own net.
He didn’t seize the opportunity and he’ll be lucky to get 1 year 1.25M from someone. He’s Bryan Berard (after the eye injury) in my book. Might be good enough for some other teams 3rd pair, but probably not for this team. Kudos to Sather for admitting when something isn’t working and drawing a line in the sand. Even if he did come back, he’s keeping the bench warm for McIlrath and Erixon in 2012. Where would Gilroy fit with Staal/Girardi, Sauer/McD, McIlrath/Erixon and Del Zotto?
by Gabby the Gutless Sniper on Jun 29, 2011 6:29 AM EDT via mobile reply actions
Great Post couldn’t agree more on Gilroy. He’s as soft as soft gets. IMO he would be lucky to be a 3rd pairing in a mediocre team. We have way better guys coming up behind him and losing him is no loss at all
by DieselCane22 on Jun 29, 2011 7:03 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I agree with Gabby here, he played himself into the position he is cirrently in. He and MDZ were given every opportunity their first season and Gilroy played here most of last season. His “lack of” is the reason the Rangers are not making him a priority. Had he played better, he would have gotten a qualifying offer. Thats it ….period. Do I want him here? Yes. I think this season is make or break for MDZ as well. How much longer do you wait for a guy to mature and start to live up to his potential? Especially when we are stacked at the position.
Absolute Worst Ranger Fan!!!!!!....yet incredibly realistic and usually correct.
For a guy like Gilroy that has a low celiing, you don’t wait very long
For someone with a very high ceiling like MDZ, you give him every opportunity. Highly skilled offensive Dmen are hard to come by and take a long time to develop. The Rangers may be stacked at D but most of the players that are on the brink are slower, defensive minded types. MDZ is something the Rangers, and most NHL teams for that matter, lack.
With Joe that is… not Gabby and Diesel. People keep talking about how all these players are “soft.” You can’t make someone be what they’re not. Let them play their game, teach them and help them get better along the way. Gilroy wasn’t signed to be “tough”. He was signed to do what he did those last couple games in the playoffs, where it seemed to me like he told himself “Fuck Tortorella” and went out and played his game.
Wasted two years for him, but I’m sure he learned a lot from the experience. Buffalo and Chicago might be destinations for him, especially now that Campbell’s gone… though I wouldn’t be surprised if Chicago went after Barker again.
Anyways, best of luck to Gilroy.
To each their own but I really don’t get the love affair with Gilroy. Hes an older player who is a good skater who is a decent puck mover and that is about it. Hes not especially gifted offensively and he offers nothing on the defensive end. Hes an ok player and that’s about it. It easy for him to look good in college when hes 3 years older than most of the kids he plays against. If you watched him at BU he wasnt even the best defensmen on his team, Colby Cohen was better no matter what the Hobey Baker voters tell you(its a popularity contest). I wish him well but in my opinion with the defensive depth here now he has zero shot to play. Hes not good enough offensively to justify being in the lineup as a PP specialist especially with his deficiencies in the defensive end.
by DieselCane22 on Jun 29, 2011 8:50 AM EDT up reply actions
How would you know if he’s not good enough offensively when the defense was essentially cut out of the offensive game plan? The only thing the defense was allowed to do was pinch, and that’s because the puck was constantly played behind the net. The offensive scheme didn’t allow for the defense to contribute.
Gilroy was left off the powerplay, which would have played to his strengths (skating, passing) had he been allowed to quarterback an anemic first unit. By your rationale, no one was good enough offensively on the Rangers to justify being on the lineup as a powerplay specialist, because we all see what the results were.
I don’t give a shit about the Hobey Baker, that’s not an indication of how a player will perform in the NHL (look at the winners this century) What I’m basing my opinion on is what I saw when he was relaxed and played his game.
Gilroy was a no doubt hobey baker winner, and it had nothing to do with popularity. The guy played out of his mind that year, and was far better than Cohen.
Gilroy is a great player, but I agree he doesn’t fit with the Rangers. Torts’ system just doesn’t fit his style, he’ll be good elsewhere. He showed that he has talent in the playoffs.
comment on the "soft" quality in players
I understand you cannot/ or it is difficult to change a players game. But Tortorella is forging a team identity and game plan and quite frankly it does not fit soft players. That’s why I believe, at least in part, Gabby is suffering. The Rangers play a grinding, high-tempo forechecking and cycling game, and many players are not suited for this task.
I personally would rather the Rangers stay clear of these types of players. My belief is that soft players disappear in the playoffs, when the intensity, checking, and physicality bar gets raised. Exhibit A: the Sedins twins were invisible in the finals. Mostly, because they had trouble adapting to a physical Bruins game. They had no room and I think were psychologically scared. Letting Marchand bitch-slap you does not look good on your resume. Don’t get me wrong, they are extremely talented but talent needs to be supplemented with physicality in this era’s game style. Its not the 80s-90s anymore where Gretzky can float around and you dont dare check him because of his stature or because of fear of McSorley retribution (partially a victim of the instigation rule).
So, in summary, not all skilled “soft” players disappear, but the Rangers team identity is not soft and it is clear the Tortorella regime wants a certain brand of play. I say let Gilroy go. He will make a fine 3rd-pair D-man somewhere else and get regular minutes. Maybe Florida. They seem to want to reach the cap basement really bad.
by truebluesince75 on Jun 29, 2011 9:16 AM EDT up reply actions
Mostly, because they had trouble adapting to a physical Bruins game
Or….because they faced one of the 5 best defensive forwards (Bergeron), along with a Norris finalist and a Vezina winner.
Kesler disappeared too, and I wouldn’t consider him ‘soft.’
Blueshirt Banter - Where Rangers' Fans Matter
Tracking the Rangers - Numbers don't lie. They just don't agree with you.
Twitter: RangerSmurf
by George E. Ays on Jun 29, 2011 9:20 AM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, more like the Western Conference gauntlet took its toll on Van. Boston had a much easier road to the Finals.
You mean perennial rival Montreal, last season Cup-runner-up Philadelphia and resurgent Tampa Bay which went to Game 7? I don’t see how the Bruins had an easier path, and certainly not much easier.
The Rangers play a grinding, high-tempo forechecking and cycling game,
The Rangers play that way because, as Tortorella pointed out literally dozens of times during the season, that while he loves his guys, they aren’t skilled enough to play any other way.
And thanks for pointing out Kessler’s disappeaing act, George. That was conveniently forgetten.
My belief is that soft players disappear in the playoffs, when the intensity, checking, and physicality bar gets raised.
So according to you (Trueblue), Datsyuk and Zetterberg won their Cup because of their checking and physicality? And Crosby and Malkin as well?
Kessler was also injured
that must have affected his play.
by truebluesince75 on Jun 29, 2011 9:30 AM EDT up reply actions
Everyone was injured. Nathan Horton was playing with a separated shoulder before his concussion.
what was Kessler's injury?
Not all injuries are the same and each can have a different effect on your play. Shoulder separations can be of a lower grade and maybe Horton was able to play around it easier.
I am not saying everyone didnt have some form of injury, but each injury is not equivalent and cannot be treated as such.
by truebluesince75 on Jun 29, 2011 9:43 AM EDT up reply actions
He was invisible in the Blackhawks series too, which was well before the injury. Both the Sedins and Kesler were fine against Nashville, who don’t exactly play a high-skill game.
Blueshirt Banter - Where Rangers' Fans Matter
Tracking the Rangers - Numbers don't lie. They just don't agree with you.
Twitter: RangerSmurf
by George E. Ays on Jun 29, 2011 9:41 AM EDT up reply actions
wow such vitriol
I never said my theory applies to every player. No opinion/stereotype is universal. So you will always have counter examples to my argument. And it will also depend on the opposing team and their style of play. If you play a less physical team, it won’t play such a large factor.
Gilroy lost a lot of battles for the puck because he wasn’t physical or aggressive enough. He also seemed to always wind up on his ass with contact, which tended to take him out of the play. And he is a good skater, so I chalk this up more to his physicality than skill.
Again, these are my opinions. Opinions are by definition neither right nor wrong. I just enjoy debating among fellow fans.
But I still believe his defensive abilities were lacking and he does not fit into Torts system. If he wants minutes he should search elsewhere.
by truebluesince75 on Jun 29, 2011 9:40 AM EDT up reply actions
Just so you know, I agree that Gilroy defensively wasn’t fantastic, and I don’t see a spot for him next year, outside of maybe a 7th guy when the team needs an offensive jolt.
It’s entertaining to me, however, that there’s a good portion that want to bring back Eminger (decent D, less than zero O, but gritty), but want no part of Gilroy (decent O, greater than zero D, not gritty). Perception’s funny sometimes.
Blueshirt Banter - Where Rangers' Fans Matter
Tracking the Rangers - Numbers don't lie. They just don't agree with you.
Twitter: RangerSmurf
by George E. Ays on Jun 29, 2011 9:45 AM EDT up reply actions
agreed
I understand the definition of “soft” is debatable, and relative to personal interpretation but I still would want much improved defensive play from Gilroy if he is to crack the top 6. He has offensive talent but will it flourish under Torts system, his is confidence shot, or would he even get the chance to prove it. All sign point to no. Time to move on. A move will benefit his career and the Rangers are stacked on D-men.
by truebluesince75 on Jun 29, 2011 9:50 AM EDT up reply actions
I’d rather look somewhere else and not bring back Eminger. For the number of minutes Eminger played, add Pashinin. He can get through a few shifts at 120% at a much better cost. I am assuming Pashinin will play at least decent D while ramming the opponent into the boards. I am assuming though.
by Leetch4prezofNYR on Jun 29, 2011 12:19 PM EDT up reply actions
Agreed
What IMO is why there is so much Anti-Gilroy was seeing what he made. Gilroy is going to test the UFA waters and has not ruled out returning to the NYR.
He would be a fool not to see how he could do on the open market especially in a year where the salaries are going to be inflated by the lack of quality UFAs.
by theprospectpark on Jun 30, 2011 12:41 AM EDT up reply actions
Vitriol? In what way?
You brought up the Rangers system, which was a fact. I countered with a fact that described why coach said they played that system.
You brought up the Sedin’s non-production in the Finals, which was a fact. George countered with the fact of Kessler’s equal lack of production.
You also said soft players disappear in the playoffs. This I don’t believe to be a fact, especially with players like Crosby captaining his team to two finals and winning one, with a player like Malkin lifting the Conn Smythe. Neither of those players, outside of their fan base, would be described as players whose styes would be described by “checking or physicality.”
I am in no way attacking you, just arguing against what you presented.
fair enough. Vitriol comment retracted.
Forums are not ideal for conveying tone.
Still I never presented anything as fact. The “soft” players comment is opinion and every argument has two sides to the coin with supporting evidence for each.
Crosby may not be overly physical but he does have some bite to his game. He is not a 80s-90s era type player. He will throw a check (or slew foot) when appropriate.
I understand why the Rangers play their system, but it also points out players who do not fit into that system. So I will discard the term “soft” and replace it with players who are not the best fit for the system.
Would Torts consider letting some players play his system and let others play their style (eg, Gabby)? Or does Torts demand it of all players, no matter their style of play? If so, then he seems to be part of the blame and it would argue that certain players will continue to languish or just not get the chance to prove themselves.
by truebluesince75 on Jun 29, 2011 10:04 AM EDT up reply actions
I think he needs to tailor the system to the players that he has— how much sense does it make to in one breath say that your team isn’t skilled enough, but in the next demand that your highest skill player play exactly like those who are said to lack such skill? That is an argument for Gaborik more than Gilroy, but Gilroy wasn’t signed because he played with “bite” or jam. He is who he is.
The coach’s job is to win. To do so, he has to put each player in a position to be successful, and to maximize their play (and of course, it is the responsibility to do the same). I do not believe Tortorella did that with Gilroy.
Are players like Gabby, MZA, Christensen being put into positions that they have the best chance to be successful? In my opinion, its a “no”. Torts doesnt even seem to “trust” MZA, whatever that means. Maybe he is concerned about his defensive game or maybe he doesn’t play with enough “bite”.
For whatever reasons, Torts seems to have preferred players with a preferred style. And if he is not going to put his players into optimal positions to succeed, then the NYR should let them go. The other option is to let Torts go. But I assume that will happen when his system does not produce results.
by truebluesince75 on Jun 29, 2011 11:25 AM EDT up reply actions
If you look at a team like Vancouver, they allow their top players to play a skill game, AND let their 3rd/4th liners play a gritty style.
If we bring in Richards, and put him on a line with Gaborik and Wolski, for example, Torts should and will probably let them play their game.
Heres a scenario.
Wolski-Richards-Gaborik
Dubinsky-Anisimov-Callahan
Hagelin-Stepan-Thomas (wonder whos taking faceoffs)
Avery-Boyle-Prust
If Torts wants to win, he would let his 1st and 3rd lines play a skilled game, while putting his 2nd and 4th lines against the other teams top lines and allowing them to play a gritty game.
However, I do agree with you that if Torts is not able to adapt (he was in Tampa) than we might as well trade our “skill” players for more gritty guys.
"Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
LET'S GO RANGERS!!!
by Moshe52792 on Jun 29, 2011 11:53 AM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
I can’t rec this often enough.
One thing I would add, on the road where it’s harder to get the matchups, you can presumably move Dubinsky up with Richards to ‘protect’ that line, move Hagelin w/ Anisimov and Callahan to play defense, and let Wolski go with Step.
Blueshirt Banter - Where Rangers' Fans Matter
Tracking the Rangers - Numbers don't lie. They just don't agree with you.
Twitter: RangerSmurf
by George E. Ays on Jun 29, 2011 12:03 PM EDT up reply actions
Makes sense to me.
"Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
LET'S GO RANGERS!!!
And I think that was in the mold of the Detroit teams of the late 90’s. Once in a while you get a guy like Shanny that has the skill but also plays in the trenches but they’d let Draper/Maltby/McCarty do the dirty work and let Yzerman and the Russian 5 work their magic.
by MyFavBaseballSquadron on Jun 29, 2011 12:14 PM EDT up reply actions
good post, moshe.
The thing one thing though, that a lot of people over look in the Richards scenario is that in Dallas, he and Neal didn’t play top competition. Ribeiro was the Center with top competition duty.
If we keep Wolski, Richards, and Gaborik together, they can play on our second line, hopefully feasting of the other team’s second lines, while a combination of Feds/boyle/prust or Duby-arty-cally play their first pairing.
It’s just a thought, and something to think about as a coach while doing matchups.
by The Blue Seats on Jun 29, 2011 12:17 PM EDT up reply actions
Agreed.
"Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
LET'S GO RANGERS!!!
Play Hagelin over MZA?
Frankly, I’m not sure Hagelin belongs ahead of Bourque at this point. Anyway, hopefully either of them would just be keeping the spot warm for Krieder in a year.
I am completely stealing this for the radio show tonight, but will give you full props
Blueshirt Banter: Covering the New York Rangers
Big Blue View: Unofficial New York Giants blog
by Jim Schmiedeberg on Jun 29, 2011 3:55 PM EDT up reply actions
Fine by me :)
"Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
LET'S GO RANGERS!!!
I think we're going to see what Torts is all about this year
He’s going to have a full roster of “his type” of players, with a core group of guys that understand what Torts wants from them.
I think we have been shedding guys that don’t fit the mold in the last 2 years. They’ve built a pretty solid young core of D-men and obviously Hank is locked up long term.
Agreed. No more excuses really, especially if we bring in Richards.
"Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
LET'S GO RANGERS!!!
Well Said
And if he is not going to put his players into optimal positions to succeed, then the NYR should let them go. The other option is to let Torts go. But I assume that will happen when his system does not produce results.
Someone please buy TrueBlue a drink here
Not only his results but as it cost him his job in Tampa; after a while his style will cause players to tune him out.
by theprospectpark on Jun 30, 2011 12:44 AM EDT up reply actions
Gabby came from a grinding/defensive system and thrived there. His struggles have nothing to do with “being soft”. I’m not entirely sure most of the people on this board even know what being soft means, apparently it applies to every player ever.
You cannot blame Gilroy for wanting to test the waters of the open market because in many ways he wasn’t given a fair chance while a member of the Rangers.
132 games over 2 seasons is not a fair chance? Please. Gilroy doesn’t fit what the Rangers want, simple as that. Stop blaming the coaching for every player’s failure.
I think part of the attraction to Gilroy
Was he was a good story to write about.
Local kid, walk on at BU, gave up his scholarship his senior year so others could make the team, wore an unusual number to honor his brother, etc.
But he was passed by DZ his rookie year and then by McDonagh and Sauer his 2nd year. That to me is as big as an indictment on Gilroy’s talent level andnhis adjustment to the NHL game as anything. The Rangers took their chance and it didn’t work out, wasn’t the first time and won’t be the last.
by MyFavBaseballSquadron on Jun 29, 2011 9:26 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Interesting point!
Yeah, i agree with you guys! I wish we could’ve traded him last year instead of this UFA mess! Wishful thinking! lol
I wonder what we might have gotten for him . . . while the mystique and perceived enigmatic value were high. In hindsight a bad move considering his contribution last year.
Of course, if we had traded him we’d be screaming “what happened to developing talent” and “giving up too soon”. OK, maybe not.
Let me know how that works out for you . . .
by SimpleManiac on Jun 29, 2011 9:39 AM EDT up reply actions
3 exclamation points? You sure you’re feeling ok?
by MyFavBaseballSquadron on Jun 29, 2011 10:44 AM EDT up reply actions
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JR6mek4AFKA&feature=youtube_gdata_player
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQONSEqmO5c&feature=youtube_gdata_player
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEnwMFJwb0&feature=youtubegdata_player
2 great goals 1 great pass. Sorry gilroy you will be much happier somewhere else (hope these links worked…phone post)
by XxC17xX on Jun 29, 2011 9:47 AM EDT via mobile reply actions
I find this fitting
it’s like he’s pondering his future
"Don't look now, but there's one too many people in this room and I think it's you." Groucho Marx
In Prust We Trust
"Kovalev would work with Tortorella like a kitty would work in a microwave.
A lot of smoke and desperate clawing at the door. It wouldn’t work. It would just be a big, hot mess." -Dig Deep
Follow me @8kpower
It’s my birthday today and this is exactly what I wanted to wake up to see on the banter. Gilroy and Drury walking out the door and nothing says happy birthday like seeing a large picture of a almost naked Matt gilroy pondering his future haha
by XxC17xX on Jun 29, 2011 10:17 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Happy BDAY!!!
"Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
LET'S GO RANGERS!!!
All these comments, and not one person said:
“Hi, I’m Matt Gilroy”
Sad.
I like Gilroy, but not for 2.3 million. To be honest, even if he could be had for cheaper, I don’t see the value in him as your 7th defenseman.
Blueshirt Banter: Covering the New York Rangers
Big Blue View: Unofficial New York Giants blog
by Jim Schmiedeberg on Jun 29, 2011 11:12 AM EDT reply actions
“Hi, I’m Matt Gilroy”
"Don't look now, but there's one too many people in this room and I think it's you." Groucho Marx
In Prust We Trust
"Kovalev would work with Tortorella like a kitty would work in a microwave.
A lot of smoke and desperate clawing at the door. It wouldn’t work. It would just be a big, hot mess." -Dig Deep
Follow me @8kpower
by Kevin Power on Jun 29, 2011 11:20 AM EDT up reply actions
Too late, I said it.
Blueshirt Banter: Covering the New York Rangers
Big Blue View: Unofficial New York Giants blog
by Jim Schmiedeberg on Jun 29, 2011 11:20 AM EDT up reply actions
tarnation
"Don't look now, but there's one too many people in this room and I think it's you." Groucho Marx
In Prust We Trust
"Kovalev would work with Tortorella like a kitty would work in a microwave.
A lot of smoke and desperate clawing at the door. It wouldn’t work. It would just be a big, hot mess." -Dig Deep
Follow me @8kpower
by Kevin Power on Jun 29, 2011 11:23 AM EDT up reply actions
Could really care less
I thought Gilroy would’ve have more of an impact here, but it probably was never a good fit in the first place. He does seem like a good candidate to be a better player under a different coach. IT just never seemed that he knew what was expected out of him, tho he did play well at the end of last year.
If the market doesnt’ work out for him I’d be fine with him coming back tho.
Last night, a comedian died in New York. Somebody knows why. Somebody knows
Dame cue cards.
"Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
LET'S GO RANGERS!!!
Oh well.
His play in his own zone just isn’t good enough to justify the cost of the qualifying offer.
Another missed opportunity
Should have traded this guy while we had the chance. He could have given us a pretty big return.
Hoggo I am compelled to rekindle our earlier debate....
…there seems to be a disagreement over what some of us call ‘soft’ in our players. There are finesse players who are not ‘soft’ and by that I mean; they are not intimidated off the puck and they aren’t afraid to go to dirty areas of the ice and give up their bodies. It has nothing to do with throwing open ice hits or elbows or dropping the mitts. We saw soft play from Gaborik all year – that cannot be disputed. Whether it was injury or not is up for debate. I’d like to think it was due to some undisclosed ailment.
Players like Datsyuk and Zetterberg play a helluva lot more physical than you think, and those are the kinds of finesse players that win championships.
So when myself and some of us demand more physicality from players you deem exempt from such effort, its because in hockey the level of desperation you play with directly affects the outcome of the game.
Guys like Zherdev and last year’s Gaborik aren’t winning you anything but an early tee time.
Guys like Zetterberg and Datsyuk leave their guts on the ice and do whatever the situation calls for to win. That is what I mean by ‘soft’ and not ‘soft.’ Soft players play one way and one way only – they float around and rely on finesse. You can have those kinds of players all you want, but I challenge you to look at some recent championship teams and show me those types of players on the rosters of the winning teams. Look at Detroit any of their Cups; the Rangers in 1994, the Devils (I hate saying it) ……….. show me one ‘soft’ player on any of those rosters. You won’t find any.
So no, everybody doesn’t have to be Brandon Prust – but there are many levels of toughness between Prust and someone like Zherdev.
Patrick Kane isn’t exactly a hard nosed player.
by MyFavBaseballSquadron on Jun 29, 2011 1:51 PM EDT up reply actions
Damn man, you went digging in the crates...
Wasn’t this from another thread? I thought we agreed to disagree. I can’t remember, I’ll have to find it.
Anyway, my argument is this: The Rangers knew the player they were getting when they signed him. Both Sather and Tortorella knew. And when he was allowed to play his game, whether “soft or fragile-a” (name that song), he put up 86 points in 76 games. And everyone loved him because he did exactly what he was supposed to, and what was expected of him.
Fast-forward a year, he’s asked to completely change his game. I understand your point of watching guys “leave it on the ice.” That is a perception. I can’t for my part recall seeing Gaborik look like he’s left his guts on the ice, as I have with Dubinsky or Callahan. Then again, I can’t recall seeing Marc Staal like that either. What I have seen is Gaborik produce. No, you’re not going to win with a roster-full of players with his temperament, but not every player needs to have a so-called average toughness (using your Prust to Zherdev scale). You have players at opposite poles. If Gaborik is at the lower end and puts up 86 points, do you give a damn how “soft” he is? I don’t.
Not many people had a problem with Gaborik’s softness when he was producing. And I think his production this year dipped because he was asked to be who he isn’t.
Gilroy is better off
without Tortorella as his Coach and not on the Rangers blueline. As has been mentioned in many comments on this board, he does not ‘fit’ in the system. Gilroy would benefit from being on more of a skill team that would also patiently allow him to come along on his defensive side. I think Gilroy’s contract coupled with the hype that surrounded him when he went to NY, had him being pushed into a role he wasn’t quite ready to occupy. Yes, he is older, and so the expectations were that much higher. Regardless, he is still just two (broken) seasons out of Hockey East, which may or may not quite prepare you to play two-way hockey in the NHL.
Im confident Gilroy will be a consistent 40-pt player in the NHL, just not in the current Rangers system.
I love me some hyperbole
but this
Im confident Gilroy will be a consistent 40-pt player in the NHLis too over the top
Post lockout, here’s the guys who can be considered “consistent” 40+
All 6 seasons:
Lidstrom, Rafalski, Chara
5 of 6:
Kaberle, Visnovsky, Pronger, Boyle
4 of 6:
Markov, Campbell, Phaneuf, Timonen, Zidlicky, Niedermayer (4 of 5), Gonchar, Weber (4 of 5 full)
I can’t possibly see Gilroy in that class of defensemen, who are basically the elite offensive defensemen/PP specialists.
I can agree that he will likely have more success somewhere else, he does have good offensive skill, but he’s not going to become one of the top offensive d-men in the league.
Blueshirt Banter - Where Rangers' Fans Matter
Tracking the Rangers - Numbers don't lie. They just don't agree with you.
Twitter: RangerSmurf
by George E. Ays on Jun 29, 2011 6:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Kaberle put up 40+ points on the Leafs
"Don't look now, but there's one too many people in this room and I think it's you." Groucho Marx
In Prust We Trust
"Kovalev would work with Tortorella like a kitty would work in a microwave.
A lot of smoke and desperate clawing at the door. It wouldn’t work. It would just be a big, hot mess." -Dig Deep
Follow me @8kpower
He didn’t get to 40 in 08-09 (though only played 57 games).
Blueshirt Banter - Where Rangers' Fans Matter
Tracking the Rangers - Numbers don't lie. They just don't agree with you.
Twitter: RangerSmurf
by George E. Ays on Jun 29, 2011 6:27 PM EDT up reply actions
oh wow…If we had room on the back end I would make a reasonable offer for him
"Don't look now, but there's one too many people in this room and I think it's you." Groucho Marx
In Prust We Trust
"Kovalev would work with Tortorella like a kitty would work in a microwave.
A lot of smoke and desperate clawing at the door. It wouldn’t work. It would just be a big, hot mess." -Dig Deep
Follow me @8kpower
I think he’ll be too expensive in this market.
Blueshirt Banter - Where Rangers' Fans Matter
Tracking the Rangers - Numbers don't lie. They just don't agree with you.
Twitter: RangerSmurf
by George E. Ays on Jun 29, 2011 6:31 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree…this cap floor thing is gonna drive prices up for guys not named Richards, Brad
"Don't look now, but there's one too many people in this room and I think it's you." Groucho Marx
In Prust We Trust
"Kovalev would work with Tortorella like a kitty would work in a microwave.
A lot of smoke and desperate clawing at the door. It wouldn’t work. It would just be a big, hot mess." -Dig Deep
Follow me @8kpower
Well than.
"Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
LET'S GO RANGERS!!!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Blueshirt Banter
Related FanShots on Blueshirt Banter
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Rangers Schedule
Next 5 Games
New Jersey
|
Sun 05/27 | TBA |
Last 5 Games
|
@
New Jersey
|
Fri 05/25 | OT - L 2 - 3 |
|
New Jersey
|
Wed 05/23 | L 3 - 5 |
|
@
New Jersey
|
Mon 05/21 | L 1 - 4 |
|
@
New Jersey
|
Sat 05/19 | W 3 - 0 |
|
New Jersey
|
Wed 05/16 | L 2 - 3 |
SBNation.com Recent Stories
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- Eulogy: Remembering the 2011-12 New York Rangers
- Stanley Cup Final: 5 keys for New Jersey Devils and Los Angeles Kings
- Friday’s Three Stars: Devils head to Final; Brodeur, Kovalchuk the difference in Game 6
- Devils eliminate Rangers in Game 6, ending fear of the past, setting course for the future
- Adam Henrique sends New Jersey Devils to Stanley Cup Final with OT goal vs. Rangers (VIDEO)
