GDT [RS] (#53) Rangers vs. Vancouver Canucks — It's Miller Time

[Ozzy]

33 minutes ago, Cash or Czech said:

I'd personally prefer a 3rd line of Goodrow, Barron and Chytil and then have a 4th with Reaves, Rooney, and McKegg/Gauthier/other filler. Chytil might not be super useful but he has the odd goal where opponents stop defending him and give him that space.

 

31 minutes ago, Sharpshooter said:

Same. Goodrow is a good Swiss Army knife kind of player, but I think he just gets lost there on the fourth line. The third is where he belongs. 

 

I really like Goodrow's versatility the same as you guys, but I think his role with Rooney and Reaves is terrific.  That line can be a real difference maker down the stretch and come the playoffs.

 

Chytil just doesn't have a spot, in my opinion.  Pete's right, Gallant wants guys that are going to be tough to play against, and Chytil loses pretty much every board battle.  McKegg is pretty much an AHL'er.  I like his effort, but he's not going to be much of a solution in my eyes.

 

I'm thinking Chytil is definitely out of the mix.  He's not a 3rd line winger, he's not a 3C, and he's not supplanting Strome at 2C.  Barron, I think has been decent.  He plays tough, and shows some promise.

 

I doubt they take a chance on bringing up Culleye or Othmann, since they're so young.  They sure as hell couldn't be worse than what we're seeing outta this 3rd line.  But I think we've got to move some players to make us a better 5v5 team, give us more depth, and possibly some cap relief for next season.

[Sharpshooter]

I'm trying not to set myself up for disappointment, but I could totally see Drury swinging for the fences by the deadline and bringing in at least two, if not three players. Depth is sorely needed.

[Cash or Czech]

23 minutes ago, Ozzy said:

 

 

I really like Goodrow's versatility the same as you guys, but I think his role with Rooney and Reaves is terrific.  That line can be a real difference maker down the stretch and come the playoffs.

 

Chytil just doesn't have a spot, in my opinion.  Pete's right, Gallant wants guys that are going to be tough to play against, and Chytil loses pretty much every board battle.  McKegg is pretty much an AHL'er.  I like his effort, but he's not going to be much of a solution in my eyes.

 

I'm thinking Chytil is definitely out of the mix.  He's not a 3rd line winger, he's not a 3C, and he's not supplanting Strome at 2C.  Barron, I think has been decent.  He plays tough, and shows some promise.

 

I doubt they take a chance on bringing up Culleye or Othmann, since they're so young.  They sure as hell couldn't be worse than what we're seeing outta this 3rd line.  But I think we've got to move some players to make us a better 5v5 team, give us more depth, and possibly some cap relief for next season.

 

Unfortunately, we don't have the depth to have that 4th line. We're essentially playing two 4th lines that have little chance to score, so when our big guys get shut down we are toast. We need at least a third line that can pop in the odd goal. We need Goodrow with other players that can score.

[LindG1000]

12 minutes ago, Cash or Czech said:

 

Unfortunately, we don't have the depth to have that 4th line. We're essentially playing two 4th lines that have little chance to score, so when our big guys get shut down we are toast. We need at least a third line that can pop in the odd goal. We need Goodrow with other players that can score.

We don't *currently have that depth. We can acquire two third liners and a top 6 wing to right-size the ship.

 

Is it that out of the ether to think we get, say, Andrew Copp, Lawson Crouse, and a big fish?

[Cash or Czech]

25 minutes ago, G1000 said:

We don't *currently have that depth. We can acquire two third liners and a top 6 wing to right-size the ship.

 

Is it that out of the ether to think we get, say, Andrew Copp, Lawson Crouse, and a big fish?

 

Not at all, but until we do that we should probably try to use what we have to help us win these tough hockey games.

[torontonyr]

I remember when we scored like 24 goals in a few games. That season didn't lead anywhere, and I'm not concerned about a couple of games where the puck just isn't going in.

 

Rangers have played decently.

[Pete]

Sorry but this is more than "the puck isn't going in"...they're not getting PPs and they're not scoring at ES...so these long time problems are now effecting the record. 3 wins and 3 losses coming out of the break. Only scored more than 2 vs Caps. 

 

5 PPs in the win vs FLA before the break...post break they haven't gotten more than 2 a game until last night. 

Edited February 28, 2022 by Pete

[torontonyr]

30 minutes ago, Pete said:

Sorry but this is more than "the puck isn't going in"...they're not getting PPs and they're not scoring at ES...so these long time problems are now effecting the record. 3 wins and 3 losses coming out of the break. Only scored more than 2 vs Caps. 

 

5 PPs in the win vs FLA before the break...post break they haven't gotten more than 2 a game until last night. 

Both of the things we're saying can be true.

[Pete]

36 minutes ago, torontonyr said:

Both of the things we're saying can be true.

Well, they are. You commented that pucks aren't going in, and I commented on why.

 

Just important to note that this isn't just a few game blip.

[fletch]

6 hours ago, Sharpshooter said:

I'm trying not to set myself up for disappointment, but I could totally see Drury swinging for the fences by the deadline and bringing in at least two, if not three players. Depth is sorely needed.

 

6 hours ago, G1000 said:

We don't *currently have that depth. We can acquire two third liners and a top 6 wing to right-size the ship.

 

Is it that out of the ether to think we get, say, Andrew Copp, Lawson Crouse, and a big fish?

 

We've got Kreider, Zib, Panarin, and Strome as solid for the top two lines.  The idea was that Lafreniere and Kakko would develop to round out two solid scoring lines.  Are we hoping to add one or two wingers to have legitimate scoring lines, or are we keeping those spaces open in hopes that Lafreniere and Kakko will develop?

Edited February 28, 2022 by fletch
typo

[-ERIK-]

20 hours ago, Phil said:

 

As opposed to, who, exactly — Gauthier?

 

There is no "good" solution to the right side right now, but Hunt was active throughout the third. So was Reaves. The Rangers were causing a ton of turnovers and generating a slew of rushes. They just ran out of time.

Anyone else,Yes I rather would have seen Gauthier than Hunt,he can at least park his body in front or

They could have stacked Panarin,Mika,Kreider,Strome,Laf and Fox once they pulled Georgie

 

[Sharpshooter]

15 hours ago, fletch said:

 

 

We've got Kreider, Zib, Panarin, and Strome as solid for the top two lines.  The idea was that Lafreniere and Kakko would develop to round out two solid scoring lines.  Are we hoping to add one or two wingers to have legitimate scoring lines, or are we keeping those spaces open in hopes that Lafreniere and Kakko will develop?

I think they will both develop fine, but I still think they could use one or two more upgrades there, whether it's a Pavelski or a Forsberg. Maybe just one, but they need a bit more pop down there anyway.

[fletch]

1 hour ago, Sharpshooter said:

I think they will both develop fine, but I still think they could use one or two more upgrades there, whether it's a Pavelski or a Forsberg. Maybe just one, but they need a bit more pop down there anyway.

I think this is an important roster construction decision.  If you are going for a deep playoff run this year and acquire a veteran for the top two lines, this is blocking/impeding Lafreniere and/or Kakko from developing and getting quality minutes with skilled players.  If you stick with Lafreniere and Kakko you are trusting that they are going to develop into deserving a slot on the top two lines.

[LindG1000]

52 minutes ago, fletch said:

I think this is an important roster construction decision.  If you are going for a deep playoff run this year and acquire a veteran for the top two lines, this is blocking/impeding Lafreniere and/or Kakko from developing and getting quality minutes with skilled players.  If you stick with Lafreniere and Kakko you are trusting that they are going to develop into deserving a slot on the top two lines.

Am I out of line if I'm increasingly wondering whether the odd man out in this decision is Ryan Strome given both the lack of a contract and the recent run of poor play by that line?

[BrooksBurner]

11 minutes ago, G1000 said:

Am I out of line if I'm increasingly wondering whether the odd man out in this decision is Ryan Strome given both the lack of a contract and the recent run of poor play by that line?

Nope. Not at all. The money that would be given to Strome represents the only substantial cap flexibility left for this team for at least the next two seasons. It’s a big decision because we still talk about changing the complexion of the top 6, in particular that 2nd line which has a tendency to go mum when space and time is taken away. If they re-sign Strome, they are strictly relying on finding the perfect (and cheap) RW who will not only complement those guys, but get them to break out of their perimeter playing, over-passing, anti-pucks-on-net mold that they are perpetually stuck in. Not even sure such a player exists (Kakko isn’t it). Hard to see it happening.

[jsm7302]

Panarin is dynamic and will flourish with pretty much anyone once that chemistry is found. 

 

Finding a young 2C for under 5mil would be amazing. Anyone slumping or not meeting expectations through out the league that fits that mold?

[Pete]

21 minutes ago, jsm7302 said:

Panarin is dynamic and will flourish with pretty much anyone once that chemistry is found. 

 

Finding a young 2C for under 5mil would be amazing. Anyone slumping or not meeting expectations through out the league that fits that mold?

Strome. (Dylan)

[Pete]

1 hour ago, G1000 said:

Am I out of line if I'm increasingly wondering whether the odd man out in this decision is Ryan Strome given both the lack of a contract and the recent run of poor play by that line?

Yes, it's out of line until another viable option is presented. 

[Ozzy]

Strome is still the guy.  I'm not going to let a stretch of games like this change my opinion.  He's going to be a very good 2C for us, for years to come.  The guy plays pretty much every situation, and a couple of games where he hits the side of the cage, or the glass doesn't deter that.

 

We're going to need him in these upcoming divisional games, and I'm expecting him to play a big part of us winning the majority of them.

[Long live the King]

2 hours ago, G1000 said:

Am I out of line if I'm increasingly wondering whether the odd man out in this decision is Ryan Strome given both the lack of a contract and the recent run of poor play by that line?

 

Hot take...contract uncertainty is weighing on both Strome and Panarin.

[Pete]

34 minutes ago, Long live the King said:

 

Hot take...contract uncertainty is weighing on both Strome and Panarin.

I think it's weighing on Strome, not Panarin. It's pretty easy to focus your defensive effort around 3-4 guys and we're seeing the effects of lack of depth scoring and lack of 5v5 effort, TBH.

[jsm7302]

31 minutes ago, Pete said:

I think it's weighing on Strome, not Panarin. It's pretty easy to focus your defensive effort around 3-4 guys and we're seeing the effects of lack of depth scoring and lack of 5v5 effort, TBH.

 

Stromer should take his 5 mil x 5 years and go win a cup with this bunch. Take the discount Stromer!