Jams if you go look at my posts from this offseason I was probably Zucc's biggest defender on here and I repeatedly said that Zucc is as far away from a Tortorella hockey player as you can have. Put him in a system where he's given an opportunity to create and have the puck in space and he can be very effective. Bottom line is that any team that boasts Nash and Gaborik has some serious offensive firepower and Torts did not utilize it properly. Also didn't help that he kept Kreider either on the 4th line or in Hartford for not being defensively responsible enough. And 62 I agree with you on Gabby on the left. It's been beaten to death on this board but when the experiment was obviously not working out Torts in his stubborn ways just kept moving him down the lineup rather than switching him back to the right and admitting he was wrong. I know Al is going to be here any second to say it's on Gabby but it's also the coach's responsibility to put his players in a position to succeed and Torts didnt do that.
Let me play devils advocate on the Gabby RW or LW thing. Look at OV. He hated being switched to RW by Oates. Struggled at first, but now he loves it there and is thriving. Gabby couldn't do the same? With that said I didn't like Torts doing it either, and thought at the time just put him back on RW please. But it has worked when a coach sticks to his guns and says this is better for you and the team long term. Just saying...
Al made that point several times. I wasn't a winger so i can't vouch for this personally, but to me OV and Gaborik are very different players. OV loves playing a power game, carrying the puck alot and going hard to the net. Gaborik is more of a sniper who depends on getting open, having somebody get him the puck and scoring with his wrist shot. That's why he was so ineffective when he got hurt, his wrister was gone. I think changing sides is much more drastic for a player like Gabby who depends so heavily on his release and being fed the puck. All of a sudden, he was getting the puck on his off side and his release was screwed up. OV can get around somebody regardless of which side he's on.
Dump...4 years at 2m for Boyle? Never thought I'd hear that out of you. I like Boyle, especially now that AV is actually using him the way he's supposed to be used, but 4 yrs might be a bit much for him.
Prod, after the way Gaborik was treated by Tort's, by the time he was traded he was just a shell of his former self. He was no longer considered anywhere close to being a real scoring threat by most Ranger fans. Before Nash came on the scene, when Gaborik was the only true goal scorer, he was a marked man by anybody he stepped on the ice against. For 60 minutes he would get beaten up and left for dead. And If I were coaching against the Rangers, that's exactly the way I would approach the match-up. Take Gaborik out, and make the grinders beat us. The problem I have with the Sather (among other things), is that he never got Gaborik any protection, and you see the same thing now with Nash. You never saw that when he was coaching in Edmonton, where somebody was always on the ice to watch Gretzky's back. Not saying Gaborik is Gretzky, but he did deserve much better than what he got from Sather and Tort's and so do the fans. What this Ranger team needs is another Nick Fotiu. As for Zuc, that wasn't really directed at you but to all the fans who werent happy with him during Tort's time at the Garden and wanted him gone. I can't honestly say that I expected this type of play out of him, but I love witnessing it. Zuccarello is a big beneficiary of AV's system, and when he is on the ice he has the ability to make his linemates 10x better.
Boyle s not bad playing on the 4th line and PK. If he could just chip in a few more goals that would be great. still can't believed he score 21 g a few seasons ago. He does play well in the playoffs and that's always a plus, especially with role Players.... Hell, he outperformed Nash last year. If Tortonto Didn't choke the Rangers would have probably beat them a d made it to the conference finals again. I wouldn't give him a raise, I think 4 years 6.4 Million is good. He's from Mass so I can't imagine he would be interested in signing anywhere other than the Northeast. On the other hand I can't imagine him not going to free agency to see what he's worth.
What is with all this 4 years stuff. Boyle cannot demand 4 years, that is too long. 2 years tops. 1.7 to 2 mill per tops.
We actually agree more than you think Jams. I agree with the target of Gabby's back, which makes it even more remarkable that he was able to hit 40 goals TWICE under those circumstances. I was strictly talking about the make-up of last year's roster, where we had both Nash and Gaborik. The previous years, especially 2011-12, this team was a grind it out team and Torts was a good coach for them. The the team got more skilled. Entering last year we brought in Nash, Kreider here, bigger role for Hagelin, yet Torts still wanted them to play like Prust and Fedotenko. He wouldnt adjust. He made the Gabby situation worse by forcing him to the left. Who knows how Gaborik would have looked had he been kept on the right where he had so much success. In my opinion last year's team was more skilled than youre giving it credit for. Good debate.
I cant believe how some of you bitch and moan about the quality of the team and then turn around and say lets resign Boyle. Hard to fathom, but i guess some of you really, truly like the guy as a player. WE NEED A HIGHER QUALITY 4th LINE..
I would be okay with Boyle for 1 or 2 years on the 4th line (much rather go only 1 year). He has a role on the 4th line. He is a nice 4th line player. I MUCH rather deal him this season OR not re-sign him and go in a different, more upside, more size or speed, younger direction on the 4th line. But if we re-signed him for 1 or worst case 2 more seasons at 1.8 or so per, I wouldn't go crazy. This 4 year deal talk is crazy to me. Just my opinion though.
I have said for 2 years now to trade him and I haven't changed my mind. That being said, if they are going to keep him it makes sense to do 4 y, 2 million for the reason I said. If they trade him next year at the deadline, basically a team will view him as a top PK, faceoff guy for 3 y, 2 million a year. That is what teams would like if they wanted to give up a second round pick for him and possibly a prospect.
I know we do Prod. My point is that even if you or I felt like they were more skilled, Tort's wasn't playing them llike that because he didn't feel like they were that type of team. At least I hope that's the reason, because for a coach to deliberately play a skilled team like a bunch of grinders was a total waste of a season. Also, watching the Rangers trying to hang onto a 1 goal lead, as Hank continued to bale them out, was not my idea of good hockey.
I guarantee that Boyle is going to get a 4 year deal from a team as a UFA. Easy. He's exactly the kind of player teams without a ton of high priced talent are going to want to sign for their 4th line. I think the Oilers give him more than 4 years, 2 million. Maybe 4 years, 2.5 million. They have nobody on that team that plays defense. I see Toronto giving him that kind of deal. I see Montreal giving him that kind of deal. Same with Columbus, Vancouver and Winnipeg. Boyle is actually a guy that draws praise from other fan bases on almost every chat board. I think it's because they see a guy who is a lot better than their 4 line players.
Montreal starting winning a lot more when Prust joined the team. So I don't think they would agree with that.
In the right system, Boyle could be a 15 or 20 goal scorer. I know if he played in Pittsburgh, he'd hit them.
When I say the right system, I mean teams that have more than one or two players who actually have some offense in their game. If he's playing in Pittsburgh, he's going to score more goals just because he won't be on anybody's radar.
