2024 Off-season Thread: Burn in Effigy

[RangersIn7]

8 hours ago, RichieNextel305 said:

And again, now it’s just because we lost to the Panthers and now the feeling is “they have more bite, we need to be like them!” Last year, we lost to Jersey and the thought process was we lost to a fast team and we need to be more like them. One thing I enjoyed listening to Laviolette at the end of season presser was him explain that Florida plays their brand, and we play ours. We need to further improve our brand. We aren’t Florida. Florida plays their way, has the horses to do that and will play that way. And just because they got us this year doesn’t mean they will next year if we continue to improve our game.

 

There isn’t one set formula to win. If there were, the blueprint would be out and every team would follow it to a T. We have some tidying up to do, for sure. But stick with the process. That’s not to say that if a deal comes up that makes sense to round you out a little more that you don’t make it. 

Yup.

 

If they got bigger and stronger we’d complain that they need more speed and skill.

 

If they got more speed and skill, then it’s… oh they’re too small and they aren’t tough enough.

 

If you try to make your roster or players be something they’re not, you are guaranteed to fall.

 

Do what you do. Just improve the roster that’s doing it and do it better. 

[Pete]

8 hours ago, RichieNextel305 said:

And again, now it’s just because we lost to the Panthers and now the feeling is “they have more bite, we need to be like them!” Last year, we lost to Jersey and the thought process was we lost to a fast team and we need to be more like them. One thing I enjoyed listening to Laviolette at the end of season presser was him explain that Florida plays their brand, and we play ours. We need to further improve our brand. We aren’t Florida. Florida plays their way, has the horses to do that and will play that way. And just because they got us this year doesn’t mean they will next year if we continue to improve our game.

 

There isn’t one set formula to win. If there were, the blueprint would be out and every team would follow it to a T. We have some tidying up to do, for sure. But stick with the process. That’s not to say that if a deal comes up that makes sense to round you out a little more that you don’t make it. 

I think it was mostly Ranger fans who felt like they needed to be more like the Devils after last year. 

 

You don't emulate the team that beat you, you emulate the team that wins it all. If Edmonton winds up beating Florida, skill and speed will be what everybody wants, if Florida wins then everybody is going to want toughness and grinding. 

 

At the end of the day, there is one constant, and this is what Boyle was talking about... The teams that win are hard to play against. Whatever style you want to play when you have the puck, whatever makes you successful, sure maybe go and do that (I would venture to say getting to the middle is also a constant), But what's undeniable is that every team that wins has an element of physicality.

 

The long and short of it is that this team is guilty of too many flybys, and unfortunately in a lot of cases it's the biggest fastest players on the team who are not imposing their will. Like @Phil said, A lot of these guys are big for the sake of being big. Being big is worthless unless you are going to go through an entire series where every player on the other team needs to worry about getting bumped every single time they have the puck. 

 

And I'll add that you don't need to be big to do that. Sam Bennett is as average size as it gets. But nobody gets a flyby when he's on the ice. And they're not all big hits, but over the course of a series, especially when the other team is nursing some injuries, they just don't want to get hit and that's when they make mistakes and that's when turnover happens. 

[Phil]

18 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

This is correct. Nobody was looking at Dallas or Edmonton this year and thinking what rugged teams they were.

 

The commonality of successful Cup winning teams is the ability to generate consistent offensive opportunities, and the ability to limit sustained pressure and high quality chances by the opponent. There’s different ways to accomplish that, but the Rangers were mediocre at all of it last year. Again, 22nd in xGF% and 21st in HDCF%. Eventually the lack of cohesive and consistent offense/defense rears its ugly head well more often than not.

 

Yes, but — and it's a big but — those teams didn't get ground out of the playoffs. They didn't get physically out muscled to the middle of the ice repeatedly. It's the HOW that matters here. Those teams also don't have to go through Florida to make the Final. Any team in the East does. It's not quite apples to apples.

[Phil]

13 minutes ago, Pete said:

I think it was mostly Ranger fans who felt like they needed to be more like the Devils after last year. 

 

You don't emulate the team that beat you, you emulate the team that wins it all. If Edmonton winds up beating Florida, skill and speed will be what everybody wants, if Florida wins then everybody is going to want toughness and grinding. 

 

At the end of the day, there is one constant, and this is what Boyle was talking about... The teams that win are hard to play against. Whatever style you want to play when you have the puck, whatever makes you successful, sure maybe go and do that (I would venture to say getting to the middle is also a constant), But what's undeniable is that every team that wins has an element of physicality.

 

The long and short of it is that this team is guilty of too many flybys, and unfortunately in a lot of cases it's the biggest fastest players on the team who are not imposing their will. Like @Phil said, A lot of these guys are big for the sake of being big. Being big is worthless unless you are going to go through an entire series where every player on the other team needs to worry about getting bumped every single time they have the puck. 

 

And I'll add that you don't need to be big to do that. Sam Bennett is as average size as it gets. But nobody gets a flyby when he's on the ice. And they're not all big hits, but over the course of a series, especially when the other team is nursing some injuries, they just don't want to get hit and that's when they make mistakes and that's when turnover happens. 

 

Yup. Playing big. Being big helps (if you also play big), but it's attitude more than anything. This team plays small. It's why I've ridden them as hard as I have for two years about getting off the fucking walls. Get into the fight or get the fuck out.

[BrooksBurner]

3 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

Yes, but — and it's a big but — those teams didn't get ground out of the playoffs. They didn't get physically out muscled to the middle of the ice repeatedly. It's the HOW that matters here. Those teams also don't have to go through Florida to make the Final. Any team in the East does. It's not quite apples to apples.

Dallas had to grind through last year’s Cup winners in round 1. VGK is basically the Florida of the west.

[Pete]

3 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

Dallas had to grind through last year’s Cup winners in round 1. VGK is basically the Florida of the west.

I feel like that was true last year, but they moved away from that identity a little bit with their acquisitions. 

 

Hanifin, Hertl, Mantha are not "grind it out" types of guys. Also Stone was hurt and not really himself. Feels like they were missing a little bit of bite from last season. 

[Phil]

10 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

Dallas had to grind through last year’s Cup winners in round 1. VGK is basically the Florida of the west.

 

Yes, and did so successfully (1) and weren't bullied out of the middle of the ice (2). Again, the how matters.

 

The reason people are calling for the Rangers to get bigger and more mobile is because they're both small and inferior puck movers. You can do both. You should do both. If the only thing available to you is a 5'9 or whatever Zac Jones, fine, but if you can get Nic Hague, DO IT.

[Phil]

6 minutes ago, Pete said:

I feel like that was true last year, but they moved away from that identity a little bit with their acquisitions. 

 

Hanifin, Hertl, Mantha are not "grind it out" types of guys. Also Stone was hurt and not really himself. Feels like they were missing a little bit of bite from last season. 

 

Yes, but all three of those guys are big, thick mother fuckers.

[RangersIn7]

2 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

Yes, and did so successfully (1) and weren't bullied out of the middle of the ice (2). Again, the how matters.

 

The reason people are calling for the Rangers to get bigger and more mobile is because they're both small and inferior puck movers. You can do both. You should do both. If the only thing available to you is a 5'9 or whatever Zac Jones, fine, but if you can get Nic Hague, DO IT.

More grit and jam in their game is needed to be sure.

But it’s among a number of things that they need. 

[Pete]

13 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

Yes, but all three of those guys are big, thick mother fuckers.

But they don't do anything with the size. They should be Rangers.

[Phil]

3 minutes ago, Pete said:

But they don't do anything with the size. They should be Rangers.

 

Mantha definitely doesn't. He's Kreider West. I still don't really know what to think of Hertl as a player.

[BrooksBurner]

23 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

Yes, and did so successfully (1) and weren't bullied out of the middle of the ice (2). Again, the how matters.

 

The reason people are calling for the Rangers to get bigger and more mobile is because they're both small and inferior puck movers. You can do both. You should do both. If the only thing available to you is a 5'9 or whatever Zac Jones, fine, but if you can get Nic Hague, DO IT.

Yeah I’m not disagreeing that a team needs to be able to not allow themselves to be bullied, like the Rangers stars do. There’s a separation between that and actively looking to physically impose your will on another team ala Florida. My point is mostly about overcorrecting and winding up signing a Patrick Nemeth because “size and strength matters”.

 

The root of the problem is still about the stars becoming small when it gets tough. Drury can adjust the fringes all he wants, but it won’t change that.

[Phil]

24 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

Yeah I’m not disagreeing that a team needs to be able to not allow themselves to be bullied, like the Rangers stars do. There’s a separation between that and actively looking to physically impose your will on another team ala Florida. My point is mostly about overcorrecting and winding up signing a Patrick Nemeth because “size and strength matters”.

 

The root of the problem is still about the stars becoming small when it gets tough. Drury can adjust the fringes all he wants, but it won’t change that.

 

That's why I keep using the phrase "bigger and more mobile." They're one continuous thought moving forward.

[Br4d]

2 hours ago, RangersIn7 said:

Yup.

 

If they got bigger and stronger we’d complain that they need more speed and skill.

 

If they got more speed and skill, then it’s… oh they’re too small and they aren’t tough enough.

 

If you try to make your roster or players be something they’re not, you are guaranteed to fall.

 

Do what you do. Just improve the roster that’s doing it and do it better. 

 

What the Rangers do is not good enough to get by a physical team with speed and scoring prowess.

 

It's just not good enough.  We've seen this 3 years in a row now.

 

There's no way the Devils had more talent than us.  They were younger and springier and we couldn't stay with them.

 

The Lightning and the Panthers may have had more talent than us but they were definitely more physical than us and we folded in both series after showing the opponent what they needed to do to shut us down.

 

There's no building this team to be better than they are.  We need to blow up the base and go from there.

 

By all means lets have a couple more 100 point seasons before nature blows it all up on us but we'd be much better off getting proactive and trying to work through the demolition.

 

Winning a Stanley Cup is hard and you need hard individuals to make it happen.  We're soft.

[Pete]

38 minutes ago, Br4d said:

We need to blow up the base and go from there.

That's not going to happen this summer.

[Br4d]

6 minutes ago, Pete said:

That's not going to happen this summer.

 

We're soft.

[Pete]

9 minutes ago, Br4d said:

 

We're soft.

That's irrelevant to the discussion.

[RangersIn7]

3 hours ago, Br4d said:

 

What the Rangers do is not good enough to get by a physical team with speed and scoring prowess.

 

It's just not good enough.  We've seen this 3 years in a row now.

 

There's no way the Devils had more talent than us.  They were younger and springier and we couldn't stay with them.

 

The Lightning and the Panthers may have had more talent than us but they were definitely more physical than us and we folded in both series after showing the opponent what they needed to do to shut us down.

 

There's no building this team to be better than they are.  We need to blow up the base and go from there.

 

By all means lets have a couple more 100 point seasons before nature blows it all up on us but we'd be much better off getting proactive and trying to work through the demolition.

 

Winning a Stanley Cup is hard and you need hard individuals to make it happen.  We're soft.

You’re not a champion till the day you’re a champion.

 

You're too soft until the day you’re not. 
 

If you wanna say they’re lacking something and that something is more grit and toughness.

Ok.

 

I agree.

Something is lacking.

I also agree that’s probably what it is. 

But that path may not be available to them.

Though I’m way more confident that a path to where they’re going does exist.

There are many ways to skin a cat.

They just have to find and navigate said path. 
Not easy.

 

 

I think your assertion, as are many of the things you’re saying, while well intentioned, are naive and impractical.

Let’s not talk about things that are not going to happen.

 

They aren’t tearing it down.

If you’re smart, you know that.

 

So let’s have a constructive conversation.

Not one that’s completely moot.

 

This one has the veracity of the Brady Tkachuk stuff.

 

Just. Not. Happening.

 

Last year, it was…. Rangers need more speed and skill.

 

This year, it was… Rangers need more grit and toughness. 
 

Next year… it will be something else… unless they win it all.

 

And then after that… it’ll be else wise.

 

 

This is what fandom is. 

 

 

 

 

[RichieNextel305]

30 minutes ago, RangersIn7 said:

You’re not a champion till the day you’re a champion.

 

You're too soft until the day you’re not. 
 

If you wanna say they’re lacking something and that something is more grit and toughness.

Ok.

 

I agree.

Something is lacking.

I also agree that’s probably what it is. 

But that path may not be available to them.

Though I’m way more confident that a path to where they’re going does exist.

There are many ways to skin a cat.

They just have to find and navigate said path. 
Not easy.

 

 

I think your assertion, as are many of the things you’re saying, while well intentioned, are naive and impractical.

Let’s not talk about things that are not going to happen.

 

They aren’t tearing it down.

If you’re smart, you know that.

 

So let’s have a constructive conversation.

Not one that’s completely moot.

 

This one has the veracity of the Brady Tkachuk stuff.

 

Just. Not. Happening.

 

Last year, it was…. Rangers need more speed and skill.

 

This year, it was… Rangers need more grit and toughness. 
 

Next year… it will be something else… unless they win it all.

 

And then after that… it’ll be else wise.

 

 

This is what fandom is. 

 

 

 

 

The thing is I don’t think they need much more when it comes to physical talent spread across a roster. I’m not pointing at one team or another team and saying that we need more of what they have. If that’s the case, every year you’re chasing. Improve your own game and success will follow.

 

Again, some agree and some don’t. But I do believe that locker room needs a kick in the ass a bit. I have concerns there about the makeup. But as far as physical talent? No.

 

I don’t know what that kick in the ass could be either. A trade, a shake up. Who knows?

 

 

[Phil]

6 hours ago, RangersIn7 said:

Yup.

 

If they got bigger and stronger we’d complain that they need more speed and skill.

 

If they got more speed and skill, then it’s… oh they’re too small and they aren’t tough enough.

 

If you try to make your roster or players be something they’re not, you are guaranteed to fall.

 

Do what you do. Just improve the roster that’s doing it and do it better. 

 

Which is why you get bigger, stronger and faster. All at once. No one is asking them to get slower or to give up on a skill-based approach.

[RangersIn7]

17 minutes ago, RichieNextel305 said:

The thing is I don’t think they need much more when it comes to physical talent spread across a roster. I’m not pointing at one team or another team and saying that we need more of what they have. If that’s the case, every year you’re chasing. Improve your own game and success will follow.

 

Again, some agree and some don’t. But I do believe that locker room needs a kick in the ass a bit. I have concerns there about the makeup. But as far as physical talent? No.

 

I don’t know what that kick in the ass could be either. A trade, a shake up. Who knows?

 

 

Winning is a process.

It usually takes seasons and many losses along the way.

 

Id argue that painful defeats and performances along the way provide said kick in the ass.

 

Thats the biggest part of the champions narrative.

 

Seems like everyone forgets that.

It’s the essence of a champion. 
 

 

[RangersIn7]

Just now, Phil said:

 

Which is why you get bigger, stronger and faster. All at once. No one is asking them to get slower or to give up on a skill-based approach.

I don’t disagree.

 

And practical ways to achieve that are scant and difficult.

Which is a reality that people ignore. 

 

Thats what I’m saying. 

[Phil]

29 minutes ago, RangersIn7 said:

I don’t disagree.

 

And practical ways to achieve that are scant and difficult.

Which is a reality that people ignore. 

 

Thats what I’m saying. 

 

Difficulty is not a reason not to try.

 

Call. Try.

[siddious]

5 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

Difficulty is not a reason not to try.

 

Call. Try.

You miss 100% of the shots you don’t take 

-Wayne gretzky

-siddious

 

[RichieNextel305]

14 minutes ago, siddious said:

You miss 100% of the shots you don’t take 

-Wayne gretzky

-siddious