I do. It is the topic of one of my favorite posts of mine, "With Apologies in Advance to One of Hockey's Greats."
For those who missed it, I pretty much went on a long tangent (I know, what else is new) about how I didn't want Shanahan on the team this season because:
a) He was asking for a limited role but I feared they would play him first and second line minutes and use him on the powerplay because he was Brendan Shanahan and that is how it had been in New York.
AND
b) In doing this, he would take away spots from the young guys, like Prucha, or Korpikoski, or other players from Hartford.
In retrospect, I could not have been more wrong, eh?
But how could I have known this. In a normal world of rebuilding a team after key departures, one would think that the coach would look to a player who had been there before and had success with the team before to fill in the blanks. One would think.
But we all know Rangerland is anything but a place where normalcy lives. Prucha does not play - hardly at all this year and certainly not anymore. Other young guys stay in Hartford and have great seasons, only to come up, get a sniff, and get sent back down as soon as their regular/overpaid/ineffective/lazy/horrific/blunder-ridden replacements are ready to come back into the lineup.
So if my reason for not wanting the Rangers to sign Brendan Shanahan truly was to protect the chances of the youth on this team - and please believe me that it was - I owe Brendan Shanahan one heck of an apology. I should have known better than to assume that the Rangers coaching staff and management would do anything that made sense. Do anything that was the logical or the right thing to do.
Brendan, I am sincerely sorry.
You have no idea how much I wish you were on this team instead of [fill in blank with name of one of the Rangers random overpaid underachievers]. NO IDEA!
I must admit though, it brings me a sense of satisfaction that I did not know it could to see Brendan have immediate succcess with his new team, even if that team is New Jersey. Good for him. Sincerely. Good for him. A class act; I never did or would deny him that, for it's the truth.
As for those Rangers, they did indeed get shutout by New Jersey tonight. Their 2nd time being shutout in their last four games. [And we aren't even counting the almost being shutout against Atlanta on Graves night].
Start raising your hands if you are shocked?
*For the record, my hands have not left the keyboard and will not for next five minutes or so. No hand raising going on here.*
Look, I had no intention of watching the game tonight, and for the most part I didn't. I had on the first period while I ate dinner and checked back from time to time. But I did not "watch" any of it. I didn't need to, which should make me sad, but I am beyond feeling guilty for not enjoying this team and am not going to begin trying to make apologies for them.
I mean, sure, this team might have accidentally scored a goal. Anything is possible. But Renney called it a "watershed" game. [Gosh how I hate that term.]. Some players were quoted as saying they were ready to come out, put the game in Dallas behind them, play hard, play committed, get the job done or whatever other crap one says when they don't know what to say and they are programed, like robots, to say whatever PC thing they've been spewing all year.
I didn't believe it for a second.
I'm still - still - of the belief this will not magically get better. This team is not good enough. The last half dozen games should have done nothing if not raise that fact in 3D lights. They don't have it in them. They never did.
This team is not a playoff team. Hell, at this rate of decline they might not even make the playoffs.
Which brings me back, for a moment to the man of the hour [day, week, month?]
Does Sean Avery change that? Make this team a team. Make them better? I am not sure. I certainly do not think he alone can do that. I repeat again - he has no one to help him score goals. He has no one to help him do anything really.
I will also stop and say that I heard a few player interviews while I was in the car Friday night. One by Blair Betts saying stuff like, I'm happy with the team as is; we have a great group as is. Another one by Marc Staal, pretty much saying, he liked Avery, don't know what happened in Dallas, but liked him when he was with the Rangers and would welcome him back if he came. [I'm summarizing, but I was driving and didn't have a pen.]
Two very different opinions. And yes, we are all entitled to opinions - players too.
But after yet another loss - another SHUTOUT loss - these players do not get to say what they want or who they don't want.
We tried it their way. The team led by Captain Drury the quiet and Gomez the vacuous. The one that opened up an impressive lead in the conference playing low scoring hockey, then transitioned down the path of boredom and lifelessness, that currently finds themselves falling, slowly and painfully, into a heartless and scoreless level of despair.
That team? I say blow it up.
Now we do it Sean's way.
It might not work at all. It might be a monumental failure. But at least I know someone on the ice will be truly caring about his team. And, who am I kidding, it should be entertaining as hell.
Showing posts with label Brendan Shanahan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Brendan Shanahan. Show all posts
Monday, February 9, 2009
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Rangers, Young Stars, Brendan Shanahan and Jaromir Jagr. . .?
Rangers:
Okay, this will be short and sweet. I was at a bar watching the game last night, and as so often happens when I'm at a bar watching a game, I cannot pay full attention. Too much noise, no sound on the TV, and someone's head always in the way. ;)
That being said, it apparently was as much the goalie's duel as it appeared from my vantage point. Credit Valiquette with what seemed to be a good game and for getting his team a point. Ryan Miller might have been spot on, but the Rangers seem to have this problem with scoring, if you haven't noticed.
I looked at Prucha's numbers today and he played 17:23, which is not only a season high, but a very high number for him in general. I only saw that he was on the ice for the goal against, although I didn't really see how it transpired. I figured though, as I lamented with a friend at the bar, that might be enough to anger Renney. You know how it works. No goals or assists to speak of, and you never know what will happen.
That's pretty much all I can say on the game. Looks like Rozsival took a face to the boards and might not play tonight. I will have to go back and take a look at that. If he can't go, Bobby Sanguinetti will make his NHL debut in Ottawa.
Game starts in just over an hour. Have fun guys.
Young Stars:
Congrats to Dubinsky and Marc Staal for making the squad. Staal is very much deserving, and Dubinsky had a great year there last year. I think the new format will prove interesting. But my first thought upon looking at the rosters was - -
Rookies are going to clean up!
Maybe that's not fair, and maybe it's going to prove very wrong, but as much as I like sophomores Staal, Nicklas Backstrom, Devin Setoguchi, Bryan Little, and Milan Lucic, I have to think that in that open ice setting, guys like Michael Frolik, Steven Stamkos, Kris Versteeg, and Blake Wheeler will score more goals.
And even if they don't, they have Drew Doughty, Luke Schenn, and goalie Steve Mason on the backend.
Either way, that will be fun!
Brendan Shanahan a Devil. . .?
http://tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=262692&lid=headline&lpos=topStory_main
TSN says - almost? maybe? I'm not sure if we can trust completely, without a contract or agreement, believe this is 100% going to happen. But, face it, if he were going to play, he'd play as near to NY as possible. So NJ does not surprise me. I DO NOT like the Devils, but I hope the perennial good guy does well if this is how it shakes down. More when it becomes official.
The Man Known As Jaromir Jagr:
I miss Jaromir, badly. So badly. Especially when this team is not scoring and their current captain lacks anything resembling a pulse.
http://www.thehockeynews.com/articles/22224-THNcom-Blog-Jagr-says-return-to-Penguins-not-out-of-the-question.html
Turns out, he might consider returning to where it all began for him, in Pittsburgh. If Mario wanted him to. Apparently all is not rosy in Russia.
Hmm.
I have so many opinions that I can't even express. I did not want Jagr to leave the Rangers. This man transformed a team that was going and had been going nowhere for almost a decade. He believed, he guaranteed, he made it happen. A historic run for him on Broadway.
People may disagree and argue over whether the Rangers are better or worse without their departed leader. I think we can all agree they are different though. And in my mind, certainly more vanilla. (Again, Stamkos, not the good kind).
If Jagr decides to come back to the NHL, and to Pittsburgh, it will be weird for a dozen reasons. I won't want him to play badly because I care for him and respect him so much. But the Penguins are a now very much hated rival for me. Then there's the whole quasi-hatred for #68 from those fans in Pittsburgh. I wonder how it would all pan out. With a year and a half more on Jagr's contract in Omsk, perhaps it isn't even worth it to think that far ahead. So much can happen.
But would I like to see Jagr return to the NHL and have a full-out farewell tour...? Absolutely. He deserves it, he really does.
Okay, this will be short and sweet. I was at a bar watching the game last night, and as so often happens when I'm at a bar watching a game, I cannot pay full attention. Too much noise, no sound on the TV, and someone's head always in the way. ;)
That being said, it apparently was as much the goalie's duel as it appeared from my vantage point. Credit Valiquette with what seemed to be a good game and for getting his team a point. Ryan Miller might have been spot on, but the Rangers seem to have this problem with scoring, if you haven't noticed.
I looked at Prucha's numbers today and he played 17:23, which is not only a season high, but a very high number for him in general. I only saw that he was on the ice for the goal against, although I didn't really see how it transpired. I figured though, as I lamented with a friend at the bar, that might be enough to anger Renney. You know how it works. No goals or assists to speak of, and you never know what will happen.
That's pretty much all I can say on the game. Looks like Rozsival took a face to the boards and might not play tonight. I will have to go back and take a look at that. If he can't go, Bobby Sanguinetti will make his NHL debut in Ottawa.
Game starts in just over an hour. Have fun guys.
Young Stars:
Congrats to Dubinsky and Marc Staal for making the squad. Staal is very much deserving, and Dubinsky had a great year there last year. I think the new format will prove interesting. But my first thought upon looking at the rosters was - -
Rookies are going to clean up!
Maybe that's not fair, and maybe it's going to prove very wrong, but as much as I like sophomores Staal, Nicklas Backstrom, Devin Setoguchi, Bryan Little, and Milan Lucic, I have to think that in that open ice setting, guys like Michael Frolik, Steven Stamkos, Kris Versteeg, and Blake Wheeler will score more goals.
And even if they don't, they have Drew Doughty, Luke Schenn, and goalie Steve Mason on the backend.
Either way, that will be fun!
Brendan Shanahan a Devil. . .?
http://tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=262692&lid=headline&lpos=topStory_main
TSN says - almost? maybe? I'm not sure if we can trust completely, without a contract or agreement, believe this is 100% going to happen. But, face it, if he were going to play, he'd play as near to NY as possible. So NJ does not surprise me. I DO NOT like the Devils, but I hope the perennial good guy does well if this is how it shakes down. More when it becomes official.
The Man Known As Jaromir Jagr:
I miss Jaromir, badly. So badly. Especially when this team is not scoring and their current captain lacks anything resembling a pulse.
http://www.thehockeynews.com/articles/22224-THNcom-Blog-Jagr-says-return-to-Penguins-not-out-of-the-question.html
Turns out, he might consider returning to where it all began for him, in Pittsburgh. If Mario wanted him to. Apparently all is not rosy in Russia.
Hmm.
I have so many opinions that I can't even express. I did not want Jagr to leave the Rangers. This man transformed a team that was going and had been going nowhere for almost a decade. He believed, he guaranteed, he made it happen. A historic run for him on Broadway.
People may disagree and argue over whether the Rangers are better or worse without their departed leader. I think we can all agree they are different though. And in my mind, certainly more vanilla. (Again, Stamkos, not the good kind).
If Jagr decides to come back to the NHL, and to Pittsburgh, it will be weird for a dozen reasons. I won't want him to play badly because I care for him and respect him so much. But the Penguins are a now very much hated rival for me. Then there's the whole quasi-hatred for #68 from those fans in Pittsburgh. I wonder how it would all pan out. With a year and a half more on Jagr's contract in Omsk, perhaps it isn't even worth it to think that far ahead. So much can happen.
But would I like to see Jagr return to the NHL and have a full-out farewell tour...? Absolutely. He deserves it, he really does.
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
Be Impressed But Don't Be THAT Impressed. . .
Honestly, I have nothing much different to say than what I have been saying all along here. It wasn't like the Rangers went down 2-0 and came back - again. Being down 1-0 is a lot less of a comeback to mount at any point, although yes a comeback it still is. And I was slightly surprised, but yet not entirely, that the game ended up going into OT and ending with a shootout, the Rangers second in a row, the third in their last four games.
Let me say though, that the shootout, now in its fourth year of existence has been veryyyy kind to the Rangers. They've hardly ever been embarrassed in it, and most of the time, they come away with the extra point. And Hank Lundqvist has a lot to do with it, yes.
So, I wasn't disappointed with the game. Actually I thought the first two periods showed a little more energy from the Rangers than their last few starts. Mind you, I said a little. But they still couldn't mount anything with that extra energy though. It's getting a little old, no? The coming from behind. The lack of goal scoring. The same old song and dance.
But it must be stated that while there were different players on these teams that played together twice in the pre-season that both of those games ended 2-1 as well (and both teams won on home ice). Alex Auld played well against the Rangers back then as well. So while I hesitate to say it was a solid game, but it wasn't as boring as they have been recently. (Sorry, I'm being blunt).
None of this stopped Coach Renney from doing some third period benching however. Nik Zherdev and Aaron Voros, both pretty invisible on the scoresheet as of late, sat most of the 3rd. (It is noted that Zherdev, who scored the lone goal in the shootout, did not take his skate as a star of the game, presumably upset about his benching. He did stay out for the stick raise, but I noticed he waited a long, long time before doing so himself). And that's fine, I guess. I mean it's just funny how it's so easy to bench Zherdev and Voros, but not the multitude of other players who have had periods of inconsistency and/or invisibility. But Dubinsky, Prucha, Zherdev, and Voros, that's . . . clear as mud.
And speaking of invisibility, Ottawa's big boys were very invisible. The splash and sparkle is gone from them. It can only be a matter of time before a big shakeup, one would assume. But what can I say about that that hasn't already been said.
Instead, the real highlight of the game, the Rangers segment on Garden Vision where the players act out movie clips. I love this segment. Let it be said, it is not shown often enough. (And for those that haven't seen it, they have done this infrequently throughout the last few seasons and with different movies and players of course). Last night they had Dubinsky doing Super Bad, Gomez doing some movie with Will Ferrell (Ron Burgundy?), Hank and I believe Voros doing "help me, help you" from Jerry Maguire, and lastly Hank and Valiquette doing "I feel the need, the need for speed" from Top Gun. True, they didn't get the volleyball celebratory high five just right, but it still made me laugh. Great stuff. They should really post these on newyorkrangers.com. Do they? I can't find anything on these new nhl sites, I'll be honest.
And while I'm on it, it's not as easy to get radio feeds as it once was. Which is crap. I tried to get the Rangers feed the other day when they were in NJ, and you click, "listen now," and get whatever is being aired on 1050 ESPN. Alright? Seriously?
Back on topic. Credit the Rangers team for winning. Because winning they are. 14-5-2. There is nothing not impressive about that. No matter how they do it. But as I've said and the Rangers players have alluded to - what happens when they can't score enough to come back? What happens when they don't score at all? Oh what I wouldn't give for a nice 6-4 game. With the Rangers winning, of course.
Tomorrow, Vancouver comes into the Garden after dropping a 2-1 game on the Island last night in a shootout. I'm sure I'll have something more to say on that tomorrow.
Around the League:
Shanny update from http://www.courierpostonline.com/article/20081117/SPORTS04/811170361/1002
"Shanahan update
The Flyers are still awaiting word from free-agent LW Brendan Shanahan after offering him what is believed to be a one-year deal worth $1 million. "We're still waiting to hear from him," assistant general manager Barry Hanrahan said Sunday night. "We haven't heard anything." General manager Paul Holmgren returned Sunday from a college scouting trip to Minnesota. Shanahan's agent, Rick Curran, was also out of town Sunday and did not return a message. Shanahan is also believed to be negotiating with the New Jersey Devils. He was expected to come to a decision by the end of last week but apparently did not receive a contract offer that met his demands, presumably in the $1.5 million range."
Can't say I'm surprised there. No way Shanahan was going to go from close to $6 mill with incentives to $1 million. Even if he does want to play. I'm curious. Very curious. What other offers, if any, are there out there?
And now a random thought here.
A lot of people are surprised Boston is doing so well this year. Well, I'm not. I thought they'd be better last year. They were. I thought they'd be even better this year. And now they are looking great. A great mix of guys. Two good goalies. Toughness. Goal scoring. They really are suprising a lot of people. Not me, though. I picked them to finish above the Rangers, if I'm not mistaken. Good for them.
Now this prompted me to look up just how the other lesser successful Original 6 teams have fared over their history. And it was very educational. I didn't look up Montreal, Toronto, or Detroit. I'll do that another day. Tomorrow? Sure, why not.
But I looked up Boston, Chicago, and New York. Boston has won 5 Cups (1929, 1939, 1941, 1970, 1972) and has 21 Division championships. Chicago has won 3 Cups (1934, 1938, 1961) and has 13 Division Championships.
New York has won 4 Cups (1928, 1933, 1940, 1994) and has 5 division championships. Five! Five!! In 80 years! That shocked me. Really, really shocked me. I mean, if I think back, I haven't seen more than the division win in the year they most recently won the Stanley Cup. The other four were in 1927, 1932, 1990, 1992. That's a massive break of - what almost 60 years. Baffling. Now I'm sure it would behoove me to do some research on what exactly a division meant in 1933, and I will, but that is still a lot of well...NOT a lot of success.
And don't confuse me. It's not as if I thought my team was massively successful. 54 years between championships alone would say that.
[Random side bar. I used to get so annoyed when the Devils fans after they won the Cup in 1995, I saw them with bumper stickers saying "It didn't take the Devils 54 years." Which is ignorant and silly. It took the Rangers 2 years, count em, 2, to win their first Cup. It took the Devils 20 years from the time they were in Kansas City and 13 years from their inception in NJ, to win their first. Chew on that. Now of course, I can't justify the 1/2 century and change they took off between 1940 and 1994. No one really can. But they won a Cup in year 2 and had won their second Cup 5 years later, their third 7 years after that. So the Devils won their 3rd Cup quicker than the Rangers. (1995, 2000, 2003). Yes. Yes, they really got us there. The future, my friends, is all TBD. ]
But back the relative lack of success in NY. And this is why, above all else, despite how much some Rangers fans annoy me when they boo or say stupid things or get on their players for the wrong reason and not on others for the reasons they should be, how I still love them because they are loyal. Come on, you have GOT TO BE loyal to like a team that since 1926-27 has won 4 championships and 5 division titles. Sure Boston should have won more Cups, presumably, and Chicago has been in depression from the 1960s until just recently, but the Rangers - they do have tradition. Quite obviously a tradition more centered around class, attitude, loyalty, character, and pride, than centered around actual success.
But, you know, I'll be honest. I hope they are more successful over the next 80 years, but I signed on for pride, passion, and tradition. And I remain loyal to that.
Let me say though, that the shootout, now in its fourth year of existence has been veryyyy kind to the Rangers. They've hardly ever been embarrassed in it, and most of the time, they come away with the extra point. And Hank Lundqvist has a lot to do with it, yes.
So, I wasn't disappointed with the game. Actually I thought the first two periods showed a little more energy from the Rangers than their last few starts. Mind you, I said a little. But they still couldn't mount anything with that extra energy though. It's getting a little old, no? The coming from behind. The lack of goal scoring. The same old song and dance.
But it must be stated that while there were different players on these teams that played together twice in the pre-season that both of those games ended 2-1 as well (and both teams won on home ice). Alex Auld played well against the Rangers back then as well. So while I hesitate to say it was a solid game, but it wasn't as boring as they have been recently. (Sorry, I'm being blunt).
None of this stopped Coach Renney from doing some third period benching however. Nik Zherdev and Aaron Voros, both pretty invisible on the scoresheet as of late, sat most of the 3rd. (It is noted that Zherdev, who scored the lone goal in the shootout, did not take his skate as a star of the game, presumably upset about his benching. He did stay out for the stick raise, but I noticed he waited a long, long time before doing so himself). And that's fine, I guess. I mean it's just funny how it's so easy to bench Zherdev and Voros, but not the multitude of other players who have had periods of inconsistency and/or invisibility. But Dubinsky, Prucha, Zherdev, and Voros, that's . . . clear as mud.
And speaking of invisibility, Ottawa's big boys were very invisible. The splash and sparkle is gone from them. It can only be a matter of time before a big shakeup, one would assume. But what can I say about that that hasn't already been said.
Instead, the real highlight of the game, the Rangers segment on Garden Vision where the players act out movie clips. I love this segment. Let it be said, it is not shown often enough. (And for those that haven't seen it, they have done this infrequently throughout the last few seasons and with different movies and players of course). Last night they had Dubinsky doing Super Bad, Gomez doing some movie with Will Ferrell (Ron Burgundy?), Hank and I believe Voros doing "help me, help you" from Jerry Maguire, and lastly Hank and Valiquette doing "I feel the need, the need for speed" from Top Gun. True, they didn't get the volleyball celebratory high five just right, but it still made me laugh. Great stuff. They should really post these on newyorkrangers.com. Do they? I can't find anything on these new nhl sites, I'll be honest.
And while I'm on it, it's not as easy to get radio feeds as it once was. Which is crap. I tried to get the Rangers feed the other day when they were in NJ, and you click, "listen now," and get whatever is being aired on 1050 ESPN. Alright? Seriously?
Back on topic. Credit the Rangers team for winning. Because winning they are. 14-5-2. There is nothing not impressive about that. No matter how they do it. But as I've said and the Rangers players have alluded to - what happens when they can't score enough to come back? What happens when they don't score at all? Oh what I wouldn't give for a nice 6-4 game. With the Rangers winning, of course.
Tomorrow, Vancouver comes into the Garden after dropping a 2-1 game on the Island last night in a shootout. I'm sure I'll have something more to say on that tomorrow.
Around the League:
Shanny update from http://www.courierpostonline.com/article/20081117/SPORTS04/811170361/1002
"Shanahan update
The Flyers are still awaiting word from free-agent LW Brendan Shanahan after offering him what is believed to be a one-year deal worth $1 million. "We're still waiting to hear from him," assistant general manager Barry Hanrahan said Sunday night. "We haven't heard anything." General manager Paul Holmgren returned Sunday from a college scouting trip to Minnesota. Shanahan's agent, Rick Curran, was also out of town Sunday and did not return a message. Shanahan is also believed to be negotiating with the New Jersey Devils. He was expected to come to a decision by the end of last week but apparently did not receive a contract offer that met his demands, presumably in the $1.5 million range."
Can't say I'm surprised there. No way Shanahan was going to go from close to $6 mill with incentives to $1 million. Even if he does want to play. I'm curious. Very curious. What other offers, if any, are there out there?
And now a random thought here.
A lot of people are surprised Boston is doing so well this year. Well, I'm not. I thought they'd be better last year. They were. I thought they'd be even better this year. And now they are looking great. A great mix of guys. Two good goalies. Toughness. Goal scoring. They really are suprising a lot of people. Not me, though. I picked them to finish above the Rangers, if I'm not mistaken. Good for them.
Now this prompted me to look up just how the other lesser successful Original 6 teams have fared over their history. And it was very educational. I didn't look up Montreal, Toronto, or Detroit. I'll do that another day. Tomorrow? Sure, why not.
But I looked up Boston, Chicago, and New York. Boston has won 5 Cups (1929, 1939, 1941, 1970, 1972) and has 21 Division championships. Chicago has won 3 Cups (1934, 1938, 1961) and has 13 Division Championships.
New York has won 4 Cups (1928, 1933, 1940, 1994) and has 5 division championships. Five! Five!! In 80 years! That shocked me. Really, really shocked me. I mean, if I think back, I haven't seen more than the division win in the year they most recently won the Stanley Cup. The other four were in 1927, 1932, 1990, 1992. That's a massive break of - what almost 60 years. Baffling. Now I'm sure it would behoove me to do some research on what exactly a division meant in 1933, and I will, but that is still a lot of well...NOT a lot of success.
And don't confuse me. It's not as if I thought my team was massively successful. 54 years between championships alone would say that.
[Random side bar. I used to get so annoyed when the Devils fans after they won the Cup in 1995, I saw them with bumper stickers saying "It didn't take the Devils 54 years." Which is ignorant and silly. It took the Rangers 2 years, count em, 2, to win their first Cup. It took the Devils 20 years from the time they were in Kansas City and 13 years from their inception in NJ, to win their first. Chew on that. Now of course, I can't justify the 1/2 century and change they took off between 1940 and 1994. No one really can. But they won a Cup in year 2 and had won their second Cup 5 years later, their third 7 years after that. So the Devils won their 3rd Cup quicker than the Rangers. (1995, 2000, 2003). Yes. Yes, they really got us there. The future, my friends, is all TBD. ]
But back the relative lack of success in NY. And this is why, above all else, despite how much some Rangers fans annoy me when they boo or say stupid things or get on their players for the wrong reason and not on others for the reasons they should be, how I still love them because they are loyal. Come on, you have GOT TO BE loyal to like a team that since 1926-27 has won 4 championships and 5 division titles. Sure Boston should have won more Cups, presumably, and Chicago has been in depression from the 1960s until just recently, but the Rangers - they do have tradition. Quite obviously a tradition more centered around class, attitude, loyalty, character, and pride, than centered around actual success.
But, you know, I'll be honest. I hope they are more successful over the next 80 years, but I signed on for pride, passion, and tradition. And I remain loyal to that.
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Sundin and Shanahan. . .
I'm not commenting on either really. Just posting for the sake of posting.
http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/NHL/2008/11/07/7336291-sun.html
So December 1st is D Day, huh? Just five months later than the first day we all thought was decision day, July 1st, 2008. Alas.
And according to the article, somehow the Rangers and Flyers make the most sense. Hmm. Well honestly, considering the Rangers need scoring and that two of their "centers" seem to play better on wing. Perhaps.
As for Shanahan, Philly does make sense because Shanny's family is in NYC and he's not pulling the twins out of school, etc. But, for less than $1 million. Didn't he, somehow, with bonuses and such, end up costing close to $6 million last year. I personally think if it were less than a million he was asking, or willing to accept, he'd be still playing for the Rangers night now.
Just a thought.
**Updated as of 11/11/08 - 5:15pm
I listened to the Isles game earlier on the radio. After the Flyers 2nd goal, the Flyers announcers said it was so quiet you could hear a pin drop in the arena. Which, considering how few fans come to games, I'm not surprised.
But what I am suprised at is the fact they had the game at 2pm at all. It's Veteran's Day. And yes they are Nassau Veteran's War Memorial Colliseum. It is a fact. But how many people actually get off work for Veterans Day? Enough to justify a day game? Enough to justify a day game for a team that can't draw very well anyway? And they did this on Columbus Day too, didn't they?
I'm stumped.
Note: Attendance was announced at 13,447**
http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/NHL/2008/11/07/7336291-sun.html
So December 1st is D Day, huh? Just five months later than the first day we all thought was decision day, July 1st, 2008. Alas.
And according to the article, somehow the Rangers and Flyers make the most sense. Hmm. Well honestly, considering the Rangers need scoring and that two of their "centers" seem to play better on wing. Perhaps.
As for Shanahan, Philly does make sense because Shanny's family is in NYC and he's not pulling the twins out of school, etc. But, for less than $1 million. Didn't he, somehow, with bonuses and such, end up costing close to $6 million last year. I personally think if it were less than a million he was asking, or willing to accept, he'd be still playing for the Rangers night now.
Just a thought.
**Updated as of 11/11/08 - 5:15pm
I listened to the Isles game earlier on the radio. After the Flyers 2nd goal, the Flyers announcers said it was so quiet you could hear a pin drop in the arena. Which, considering how few fans come to games, I'm not surprised.
But what I am suprised at is the fact they had the game at 2pm at all. It's Veteran's Day. And yes they are Nassau Veteran's War Memorial Colliseum. It is a fact. But how many people actually get off work for Veterans Day? Enough to justify a day game? Enough to justify a day game for a team that can't draw very well anyway? And they did this on Columbus Day too, didn't they?
I'm stumped.
Note: Attendance was announced at 13,447**
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Thank you Shanny. . .
Pretty much from the moment he came to New York two years ago, Brendan Shanahan became Shanny. Just Shanny. That journey ended yesterday as Shanny told Larry Brooks (NY Post) that he was telling his agent to open talks with other clubs. The time had come and gone for his return to NY.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/10292008/sports/rangers/shanahan_wont_wait_for_rangers_135879.htm
I already wrote ( "With Apologies in Advance to One of Hockey's Greats") a while back and stated that I don't think Shanahan should come back. And not for not liking him, appreciating him for what he did, or appreciating who he is. But for the fact that there is no way that he'd play fourth line minutes. It would take a matter of a few weeks before the lines would be juggled and Shanahan would be on the top powerplay unit and playing 20 minutes a night. Trust me. And to have him on the top line, taking time and a roster space away from other younger players is wrong, in my opinion. If Jaromir Jagr and Martin Straka were told, thank you, but we're moving in a new, youth-oriented direction, and then the Rangers signed Shanahan a few months later, it would seem odd to me. (I guess by the same token it would seem odd if and when Mats Sundin comes around this year, but that's neither here nor there). Again, this is only my opinion, but given the past, and given the constant line changes that go on nightly at the Garden, one can hardly blame me.
Without repeating too much of what I said back in early September, I am glad Shanahan became a Ranger. I know it changed the dynamic of the team and I think for the better for the most part. Nothing is perfect. And yes, if given the right role, he could still play, absolutely. It's more about lack fo trust that will happen the right way, than lack of trust Shanahan is still an admirable and effective player.
Bottom line, if Shanahan never signed with the Rangers, I'd still think of him as one of those guys that won championships with Detroit. And that's short-sided and wrong. Shanahan has been a tremendous hockey player with a great, great career. He should be proud. And I'm proud he was a Ranger.
That being said, he was a Ranger for 2 years. A proud Ranger. A loyal Ranger. All very admirable. But it was 2 years. There were a lot of other guys that played here longer, that did more, that are no longer here.
Shanahan wasn't my favorite Ranger. He will probably never come close. But he was loyal and he had moments on Broadway I will remember. And he had this smile and this funny way of telling stories. I'll miss that. One of my favorite moments was watching him fight Donald Brashear in December of 2006. Showed his character. One of my least favorites was being there to watch him and Mike Knuble collide. Showed how fragile a game hockey is. Anything can happen at any time to anyone.
That being said, I wish him all the success in wherever he goes (if he does), and if not, I thank him for his two years here, and for all he did in his career. I applaud the good guys. And he is a good guy.
As a tribute to a great guy and a tremendous hockey player:
http://thehockeynews.com/articles/15097-Getting-To-Know-Brendan-Shanahan.html
http://www.nypost.com/seven/10292008/sports/rangers/shanahan_wont_wait_for_rangers_135879.htm
I already wrote ( "With Apologies in Advance to One of Hockey's Greats") a while back and stated that I don't think Shanahan should come back. And not for not liking him, appreciating him for what he did, or appreciating who he is. But for the fact that there is no way that he'd play fourth line minutes. It would take a matter of a few weeks before the lines would be juggled and Shanahan would be on the top powerplay unit and playing 20 minutes a night. Trust me. And to have him on the top line, taking time and a roster space away from other younger players is wrong, in my opinion. If Jaromir Jagr and Martin Straka were told, thank you, but we're moving in a new, youth-oriented direction, and then the Rangers signed Shanahan a few months later, it would seem odd to me. (I guess by the same token it would seem odd if and when Mats Sundin comes around this year, but that's neither here nor there). Again, this is only my opinion, but given the past, and given the constant line changes that go on nightly at the Garden, one can hardly blame me.
Without repeating too much of what I said back in early September, I am glad Shanahan became a Ranger. I know it changed the dynamic of the team and I think for the better for the most part. Nothing is perfect. And yes, if given the right role, he could still play, absolutely. It's more about lack fo trust that will happen the right way, than lack of trust Shanahan is still an admirable and effective player.
Bottom line, if Shanahan never signed with the Rangers, I'd still think of him as one of those guys that won championships with Detroit. And that's short-sided and wrong. Shanahan has been a tremendous hockey player with a great, great career. He should be proud. And I'm proud he was a Ranger.
That being said, he was a Ranger for 2 years. A proud Ranger. A loyal Ranger. All very admirable. But it was 2 years. There were a lot of other guys that played here longer, that did more, that are no longer here.
Shanahan wasn't my favorite Ranger. He will probably never come close. But he was loyal and he had moments on Broadway I will remember. And he had this smile and this funny way of telling stories. I'll miss that. One of my favorite moments was watching him fight Donald Brashear in December of 2006. Showed his character. One of my least favorites was being there to watch him and Mike Knuble collide. Showed how fragile a game hockey is. Anything can happen at any time to anyone.
That being said, I wish him all the success in wherever he goes (if he does), and if not, I thank him for his two years here, and for all he did in his career. I applaud the good guys. And he is a good guy.
As a tribute to a great guy and a tremendous hockey player:
http://thehockeynews.com/articles/15097-Getting-To-Know-Brendan-Shanahan.html
Friday, October 17, 2008
Should He Play or Should He Go. . .?
I have read, listened to, and literally gotten sick keeping track of all the talk over keep him/trade him, like him/think he's not worth it, on Petr Prucha, and I've waited a long time to respond. So, now that I am . . . let's go. . .
I've listened to it all. Really. And I'm not saying he is blameless. I'm not saying he is perfect. I'm not saying anything really. Except give the kid a damn break. There, I said it. Give him a break. Whether he sticks with this team for ten years or gets traded tomorrow. . .this is a kid that has, honestly, tried his best. Really. I'd like to see someone argue that he hasn't.
And now the facts and then my honest to goodness opinion.
Petr came into the league as an unknown in the 2005-2006 season. During which, he came in under the radar and at a time when almost everything was clicking on the Rangers. Guys like Jaromir Jagr, Martin Straka and Michael Nylander were resurrecting their careers. Hank Lundqvist emerged, also as a relative unknown, to lead the team into the playoff picture. The way the team was clipping before the Olympic break, I'd be hard pressed to believe they wouldn't have continued on into the late rounds of the playoffs and perhaps even the Final. As it was, the team fell apart post-Olympic break and stumbled into the playoffs, leading to a quick, painful exit in four to the team from NJ.
Regardless, Jagr would go on to have a career type year, setting all time records for Rangers goals and points in that year. Prucha would get prominent time on the Powerplay with Jagr, and on the team's top lines. He managed to score 16 goals on the man advantage that year- a Rangers record for a rookie. He scored in six straight games in December of that year, tying a franchise mark for rookies. His shooting percentage was one of the highest in the entire league.
A knee injury right before the 2006 Olympic break set him back a little. His heart was bruised most of all, but he still managed to have a great rookie year.
The following year, in came Brendan Shanahan. And, because I grew to like the guy, I will not say I'd want to take that back. He provided strong leadership, proved he was not washed up, and came through with goals (especially timely shootout ones). However, if I were Petr Prucha, I'd wish that Shanahan never came to the Rangers at all. (I also feel Petr is probably too nice a guy to say that himself but it's true). He went from starring on Broadway with Jagr and piling up Powerplay goals, to sitting on the bench during those key stretches. His numbers were good, but they weren't as good as the previous year. Am I suggesting that the only reason he didn't produce OR that the equation is a simple as << shanahan =" Prucha's">>? - no. But I am saying that to not think one has anything to do with the other is maddening.
During Petr's first year here, they had more role and support type players, and in my opinion more success (05-06 could have won the Cup. 06-07 they beat themselves in the playoffs. 07-08, not a good year at all really). That team was built around one or two really good guys. But when you added Shanahan to a team that already had Jagr and Straka and co. . . things were going to be different. A coach like Renney and/or a GM like Glen is not going to have a player like Petr Prucha out on the Powerplay when he could have Brendan Shanahan out there. Bottom line. So, those numbers went way down. Also for whatever reason (blame Jagr, blame Renney, blame Glen, blame Perry Pearn - take your pick. Although if seriously, if any of the guys in suits were letting Jagr dictate everything that happened on that PP and who should be on it - the team was doomed anyway. So much for democracy) the powerplay failed to score as much in 06-07 and especially 07-08, and the guys on it were rarely changed. It was the same thing night after night, month after month. Again, blame who you want for that. But Petr went from 16 PP goals, to 8 the following year, to finally 2 last season.
Year three for Prucha on Broadway was the most frustrating yet. He scored in his first game, I believe, but then took a long time to score again. He totaled merely 7 on the year after getting 30 and 22 in his first two campaigns. His two best stretches of the year were towards late December 2007, where he scored two goals in a game against Toronto, and a good stretch in January where he played on a line with Nigel Dawes and Brandon Dubinsky. His best game (ironically one I missed - damn business trip) was a 2-1 win over Buffalo on January 16th, where he scored a goal, got an assist and was named the game's first star. That seems a thousand years ago for me. Probably for him too.
But those moments were few and far between. Why? Because as a result of that 2 goal game in Toronto, his hand got slashed and he missed some games. Luckily he came back during a time he could fit in on a line with Dubinsky and Dawes. That line worked for probably 2-3 weeks. Then, Petr got injured again, I believe in an early February (10th?) game against Washington. This time it was his knee and he was held out a little longer. And longer still when guys like Callahan (who had been in Hartford rehabbing his own knee) came back into the lineup and deserved to stay. Dawes, for his own, played well in the tail half of the season. Jagr, obviously, did not have a great year. Dubinsky was called on to play with Jagr. Two $7 million centers and he has to play with the 21-year-old kid. (Which for the record, is fine by me; I'm not attacking what worked. He and Dubinsky looked great at times last year and both benefited from each other). My point is, there really wasn't a place for Petr to come back to. He finally got a sniff in the lineup for two games when Scott Gomez needed a few days. But for the most part, he didn't play. Even when guys like Shanahan should have been resting so that someone would be fresh for the playoffs the team was limping towards. But, no, no one did rest.
When he got back in for a random game or two in the playoffs, he looked lost. And who can really blame him. Think about it. As a goalie can tell you how hard it is to play after not playing for a while, it is no easier for a young skater to do so.
Sports are funny. Chemistry and confidence are everything. Well maybe not everything, but two of the most important aspects.
Excuse what I'm going to say next. I realize there is more to it all that just this. But I'm allowed my opinion.
I personally believe we can bring all this back to Michael Nylander's departure from the Rangers. If Nylander stayed, Jagr would have been fine. He would have scored more goals, triggered his contract and would probably still be a Ranger today. That's my opinion. But Nylander couldn't get his 4 year $4 million contract, and they gave $7 million a piece to both Gomez and Chris Drury instead, neither of whom could play with Jagr. I personally, and I won't know for a few years, maybe more, think this was the turning point for the franchise. Now, if the Rangers go forward and succeed, fine. But if they go back to the dark ages before the lockout, I'll look back to that moment. That's my lesson on chemistry. Savoring it when you have it because you don't know when it'll come again. Or if. . .
As for confidence, it's a mental thing. Hockey is a mental game. Most sports are! And you can't take a kid who has all the confidence in the world and loves playing the game, and use him in a game of musical lines. It hurts their progress. If nothing else, when all is said and done I hope (I hope!) whether it is in NY or on another team, that Prucha can rebound and be a good player. Because he was without a doubt and with no uncertainty in my mind - misused. His progress was halted. He was, of course, also the recipient of bad luck and bad timing. Those things happen. But to be misused as so many young athletes have been on this team before him, must sting even more.
I have an analogy for you. In baseball when a player is slumping, you don't keep him on the bench, at least not usually. You let him stand there and hit .100 while he figures it out. You count on the other guys in the batting order to pick up the slack for him. And he does other things, like field and make defensive plays. True, hockey and baseball are not the same, but you tell me how a kid is going to gain any confidence by being shuffled in and out of the lineup every third or fourth game? And when its his turn to be shuffled in, it's with completely different linemates that he finds himself. Because I don't think that's how it works. And that's what's been asked of Petr for the entirety of last season and so far again this year.
All I'd have hoped for to start this season was for Prucha to get a chance to get into a groove. If he played the first 10 or so games, game in, game out, with the same line, and he still didn't produce anything - then maybe it can be called a failed experiment. But to shuffle him (and the other poor guys in this horrific and saddening game of 3rd line carousel) around like this, does nothing for his own confidence or for any chemistry that he might build with anyone.
The only thing beyond that I can say is that while everyone wants to do well, I'm not sure everyone else shows it more than Petr. (Except perhaps the former Ranger Marty Straka). Pete wants to play, wants to contribute, and wants to get the chance, and it shows. The concentration on his face during the pre-game skate and during the game on Wednesday were particularly visible. This guy wants to be there. He wants to be counted on. And to contribute. And the fact that he didn't score, probably plummeted his confidence still. Even more, the fact he doesn't know when or if he'll get another chance.
Right now, thanks to the above and the fact that the Rangers already HAD a bunch of excess forwards and proceeded to go out and sign even MORE guys during the off-season, there is little room for Petr. And he's not alone. Dan Fritsche, Patrick Rissmiller, and Dawes are the other guys in this roulette wheel, and I honestly feel for all of them.
But I feel the worst for the guy that never complained, did everything with a smile, and put his heart on the line over and over again.
If Prucha can't be on this team - and I mean truly, truly, on this team - and be given a chance to regain his former status, then for his own sake, I hope he gets traded. It will break my heart, but I hope that if he gets traded, he goes to a team that can let him play solid minutes for all 82 games and that he gets into a groove and shows the hockey world something. That he shows the 30 goals his rookie year were more than just a fluke, shows that he can contribute more than just goals for his game to be effective, and shows that he can be confident and productive in this league.
For him, I hope. And I hope soon. Because to watch the roulette-carousel-musical chairs charade, it's getting old. And just imagine how he feels.
*Note: as of 11:30 am this morning, Prucha is scheduled to be scratched for tonight's game, after what was in my opinion, a v. strong effort on Wednesday. My previous line suggestion of Callahan, Fritsche and Prucha, is almost complete again, minus one. Dawes is scheduled to skate with those two tonight. If Dawes stubs his toe, will Prucha play with those two instead? Will he play with them Saturday, or Monday? Time will tell.*
*Note 2: A bunch of people will be saying that Prucha is first in line to go and/or should be producing more because of his $1.6 million contract. Right. Sure. I'd blame a kid for taking what was probably a fair amount of money two years ago when he signed the contract. (And I mean fair cause he had a great year and because look at what other guys get after having crappy years!!) Cause we all thought that in two years people would be jumping to trade a guy for the extra $0.6 he is making. The argument makes me sick. Don't blame him. Blame Sather for paying four guys 49% of the team salary when only one (Hank) of which deserves it! Prucha and his $1.6 should have nothing to do with it!*
Thursday, September 11, 2008
With apologies in advance to one of hockey’s greats. . .
Okay, that's it. I'm mad. I've maintained a very, very careful balance of indifference, tolerance, and nervous excitement in the Rangers movements this summer, and that was hard at times. And yes, before you try to point out that I was threatening to vomit over a theatre balcony after they signed Redden to the six year, 6.5 million dollar contract. . . okay, hold on, I really can't argue against that. I was mad for that one too. But I'm mad again, and this time it's not at what the Rangers have done, but at the constant back and forth of what they will or will not do!
North of the border and among us hockey knowledgeable Americans, Mats Sundin is the person everyone is sick of hearing about. Will he play, won't he play? For what team will he play? (For the record, I gave up on that tiring charade a few weeks ago. I love you Mats, but I think everyone should just collectively move on to their plan "B"s and if you want to play in January, you can have your pick of the teams that can and will have you then. End of story). But no, no, it is not this particular 35+ year old great player whose last name begins with an S that I'm talking about. It's one of the OTHER 35+ year old great players who's last name begins with an S. Teemu Selanne you ask? No, no. I'm talking about one Brendan Shanahan.
I won't lie to you. Or at least I'll try not to. Before Marcus Naslund came to the Rangers and when Jaromir Jagr was still hanging onto hope of returning to Broadway, I had a dream of the great Czech and the great Swede playing together. When Jagr is healthy and puts his mind to it, there are few better in the league. Mats Sundin, a player I've always liked, had a remarkable season last year. Forget whoever the heck the Leafs representative was for the All-Star tilt in Atlanta - it should have been #13. Of that I am certain.
But, when Naslund was signed and Jagr went back to Siberia, that was, to me, the final step in the dismantling of the post-lockout Rangers. The somewhat overwhelmingly Czech-friendly, the somewhat comprised of rather older, the somewhat mish-mosh of players that had been on the team for the better part of the last three years, be it for two or all three of those years. And I included Brendan Shanahan in that bunch, even though, understandably, he was never "officially" gone. Now, again, I had personally said and felt very strongly that when Jagr, Martin Straka, and Sean Avery left, this team would be different. The atmosphere would indeed change. For better or worse, I couldn't guess. But it would change. The Rangers now, as everyone it seems has mentioned - be it media or fans - could look to their $14 million worth of big centers - Scott Gomez and Chris Drury - to lead the team going forward. They brought in Nik Zherdev and the aforementioned Naslund, in my opinion, to get some guys that these centers could skate with. (Again, getting two high priced centers that could not play with your top line of Straka and Jagr was not the most perfect plan, but who could have forseen that? Again, I repeat, Michael Nylander was not looking so bad after last year, was he?). They brought in a group of guys - Aaron Voros, Patrick Rissimiller, Andreas Jamtin, etc - to fill in some spaces, although I'll be perfectly blunt in asking - what spaces? Sure, sure, if these guys a) play and b) fill a role then c) I'll be more than happy to admit I was wrong. But, honestly, my money is on that one of those three play. Maybe. One.
But I'm getting off track. The Rangers now have Naslund and Zherdev, Voros, Rissmiller, Jamtin. They already had Ryan Callahan, Nigel Dawes, Petr Prucha, Fredrick Sjostrom and Colton Orr that played the bulk of the wingers time this past season of the players that have not moved on or been traded. The Rangers also have a bunch of guys in Hartford whose names I've been hearing for years now - P.A. Parenteau, Hugh Jessiman, Lauri Korpikoski (the one game, one goal guy from last years series with Pittsburgh), to name a few. And Nedved, who can probably play center or wing. (Betts and Dubinsky, as a reminder, are the other two centers). Remind me again how many guys take the ice for a team again? Yeah, the norm is four lines at three guys per, so 12 guys, regardless of whether the coach rolls all four. They dress. And 4 of those are centers, so that leaves 8 spots for wing. So...
I am not the type of person to sit here and make out lines. I really am not. I've seen 47-hundred combinations on blogs this summer alone. And some are typical, some are downright idiotic. And I don't think mine would be much better. But, if we are to assume that Naslund and Zherdev have spots locked up, that leaves 6 spots. Six spots for 8 guys. 9 guys if you included Nedved, 12 if you include some Hartford guys, and 13 if you include Shanahan. (I swear, it was not my intention to make it to 13 - ha!). Now, obviously, training camp and the pre-season is a time to make these decisions, so I'm not saying these guys should not be at camp. Hell, I'm all for having them fight it out - I'll be perfectly honest. But.....I have a few specific problems with adding Shanahan to that list of players trying to make the team. I do.
Because, let's be honest here. Guys like Callahan, Dawes and Orr have been with the team, either last year or the two years before it. They've paid dues and done well in their roles. So they should in all honestly make the team. Down to three. Now, what it comes down to, is do I want at least two of the three of the remaining players that play the bulk of the time (barring injuries and all the other good and bad that might change the original vision of a hockey team that is held at the start of season) to be players who are young, fast, and eager? I do.
Now Shanahan, well, he used to be fast. And he's as determined and as full of heart as they come. That's why I grew to like him here. I really, really did. But. . .
I really do think that having Brendan Shanahan on the team impedes the growth of the young guys. I really do. And not even because I think he invites it. It just seems to happen. When Shanahan came into the fold, he got the first or second line minutes, depending on what line Tom Renney chose to create that week. He got top unit play on the Powerplay, despite the team's absolute and utter inability to not only score with the man advantage but to look like they had any chance in hell of scoring on it. When Shanny played on the PP, guys that had been successful and shown results on the Powerplay, like one Petr Prucha, took a back seat. Those are facts. I'm not trying to make a direct correlation between the two, but I mean fact remains that if one guy plays that role and takes that ice time, that's one less guy that there is room for to play that same role, if you are following me.
Now, if Shanahan were to say that he wanted to play the minutes of a fourth liner, do some time on the penalty kill, where he is very effective, and win some games with those nice shootout goals, I am all for that. Sign him up, let him keep his A, and I can go home happy.
My problem, is I don't believe it will go down like that. I want to, but I can't. If Shanny makes the team it won't be long before he's somehow managed to end up on the 2nd or 1st line. And it won't be long until he's managed to end up on the one-has-to-assume-it-will-be-better-than-last-year-but-these-are-the-New-York-Rangers-so-you-never-know Powerplay. Seriously, I'm not a psychic, but this is how I see it playing out.
And that upsets me. This is, more than probably, Shanahan's last season in the league. A marvelous guy with a marvelous career. And he should have had a more fairy-tale ending than the dismal and disappointing second round beating at the hands of Pittsburgh. He should have. And honestly, I wouldn't have appreciated him if he had not come to New York because I short-sidedly did not like Detroit so I never paid attention to him and the many great players that played there. I accept that, and part of me regrets it. And Shannahan's coming to NY helped resurrect that. I'm glad he came to NY because I got to see one of the true talents in this league night in, night out. And as for a guy - he is a great guy. I was there the day he and Mike Knuble had their unfortunate collision on Garden ice. The place was silent. I know he has the respect of everyone - fans, coaches, media, teammates. I'm saying all this, but that still might not mean enough in the end.
What my concern comes down to is that we're looking at a guy who is saying he's rested, refreshed, and ready to go. But he's still 39 years old. We are all not Gordie Howe. Honestly, really, we aren't. Shanahan, and yes the untimely and unfortunate concussion and knee injury had a lot to do with this, sure, lost a lot of his steps in the time following 2/17/07. He did. And I'll be honest with you, if I knew he was going to take a lesser roll (AND that the coaching staff would be both willing and forceful to that end) I'd really want him on the team.
But the thought of him taking a spot from some young guy who has played with the team before like Prucha, or some young guy like Korpikoski who has been waiting in the wings (literally) for years, upsets me. Because the bottom line is that it's not just a matter of him taking a roster spot for a year. Which is what it would be. It's the fact that they might have to TRADE one of these guys to make room to KEEP him. That's why I am mad. Because then, regardless of the other concerns I've just mentioned, you are now shuffling a team, a team you've already mantled and dismantled and who knows what the freak-antled they've done now, for a guy that will play, at most, a year, and at best, at full strength for half the year.
For he will slow down. It's inevitable. And not at the price of a roster spot for a year. But at the price of some guys that will have to be traded. And they'll be traded away and, if history repeats, go on to play good roles on other teams. (The Rangers do not have a good track record of handling youth, let me tell you). So he'll be here, at the price of these guys that have worked their way up the system and been waiting, waiting as patiently as the rest of us for the Rangers promised youth movement. Oh and no, ladies and gentlemen, it is not 1998. It's 2008. The Rangers have been dis-re-freak-antling their team for a decade now. And youth was promised. And youth was rarely delivered. Now I'm already not happy with the excess of salary money being tied up in four guys and I've made that clear. Jagr is gone. Straka is gone. I think it's the ONLY time for this team to truly embrace the youth. Honestly, it might be now or never. And if that means no Shanahan, I'm sorry, but my vote, is for no Shanahan.
Now, whether Brendan Shanahan comes back or not, I have no choice. But if he plays, I will hope and cheer and pray with all I have in me that he has a monster of a season on Broadway this year. Not to start the season, not to end the season, but this whole year. I will sincerely hope that I was completely and utterly wrong with my above assessment. Because then, and only then, if he looks into the eyes of the Rangers fans and of his former teammates (whomever gets traded away to make his last year on this team a reality), can he say it was truly worth it.
If not, he owes quite a few people an apology. Myself included.
**Author's note. Brendan Shanahan has been a truly classy, talented and professional player and person in this league for a long time. I want that to be clear. The above is merely my opinion. I do not indend for it to take anything away from a guy I completely respect.**
North of the border and among us hockey knowledgeable Americans, Mats Sundin is the person everyone is sick of hearing about. Will he play, won't he play? For what team will he play? (For the record, I gave up on that tiring charade a few weeks ago. I love you Mats, but I think everyone should just collectively move on to their plan "B"s and if you want to play in January, you can have your pick of the teams that can and will have you then. End of story). But no, no, it is not this particular 35+ year old great player whose last name begins with an S that I'm talking about. It's one of the OTHER 35+ year old great players who's last name begins with an S. Teemu Selanne you ask? No, no. I'm talking about one Brendan Shanahan.
I won't lie to you. Or at least I'll try not to. Before Marcus Naslund came to the Rangers and when Jaromir Jagr was still hanging onto hope of returning to Broadway, I had a dream of the great Czech and the great Swede playing together. When Jagr is healthy and puts his mind to it, there are few better in the league. Mats Sundin, a player I've always liked, had a remarkable season last year. Forget whoever the heck the Leafs representative was for the All-Star tilt in Atlanta - it should have been #13. Of that I am certain.
But, when Naslund was signed and Jagr went back to Siberia, that was, to me, the final step in the dismantling of the post-lockout Rangers. The somewhat overwhelmingly Czech-friendly, the somewhat comprised of rather older, the somewhat mish-mosh of players that had been on the team for the better part of the last three years, be it for two or all three of those years. And I included Brendan Shanahan in that bunch, even though, understandably, he was never "officially" gone. Now, again, I had personally said and felt very strongly that when Jagr, Martin Straka, and Sean Avery left, this team would be different. The atmosphere would indeed change. For better or worse, I couldn't guess. But it would change. The Rangers now, as everyone it seems has mentioned - be it media or fans - could look to their $14 million worth of big centers - Scott Gomez and Chris Drury - to lead the team going forward. They brought in Nik Zherdev and the aforementioned Naslund, in my opinion, to get some guys that these centers could skate with. (Again, getting two high priced centers that could not play with your top line of Straka and Jagr was not the most perfect plan, but who could have forseen that? Again, I repeat, Michael Nylander was not looking so bad after last year, was he?). They brought in a group of guys - Aaron Voros, Patrick Rissimiller, Andreas Jamtin, etc - to fill in some spaces, although I'll be perfectly blunt in asking - what spaces? Sure, sure, if these guys a) play and b) fill a role then c) I'll be more than happy to admit I was wrong. But, honestly, my money is on that one of those three play. Maybe. One.
But I'm getting off track. The Rangers now have Naslund and Zherdev, Voros, Rissmiller, Jamtin. They already had Ryan Callahan, Nigel Dawes, Petr Prucha, Fredrick Sjostrom and Colton Orr that played the bulk of the wingers time this past season of the players that have not moved on or been traded. The Rangers also have a bunch of guys in Hartford whose names I've been hearing for years now - P.A. Parenteau, Hugh Jessiman, Lauri Korpikoski (the one game, one goal guy from last years series with Pittsburgh), to name a few. And Nedved, who can probably play center or wing. (Betts and Dubinsky, as a reminder, are the other two centers). Remind me again how many guys take the ice for a team again? Yeah, the norm is four lines at three guys per, so 12 guys, regardless of whether the coach rolls all four. They dress. And 4 of those are centers, so that leaves 8 spots for wing. So...
I am not the type of person to sit here and make out lines. I really am not. I've seen 47-hundred combinations on blogs this summer alone. And some are typical, some are downright idiotic. And I don't think mine would be much better. But, if we are to assume that Naslund and Zherdev have spots locked up, that leaves 6 spots. Six spots for 8 guys. 9 guys if you included Nedved, 12 if you include some Hartford guys, and 13 if you include Shanahan. (I swear, it was not my intention to make it to 13 - ha!). Now, obviously, training camp and the pre-season is a time to make these decisions, so I'm not saying these guys should not be at camp. Hell, I'm all for having them fight it out - I'll be perfectly honest. But.....I have a few specific problems with adding Shanahan to that list of players trying to make the team. I do.
Because, let's be honest here. Guys like Callahan, Dawes and Orr have been with the team, either last year or the two years before it. They've paid dues and done well in their roles. So they should in all honestly make the team. Down to three. Now, what it comes down to, is do I want at least two of the three of the remaining players that play the bulk of the time (barring injuries and all the other good and bad that might change the original vision of a hockey team that is held at the start of season) to be players who are young, fast, and eager? I do.
Now Shanahan, well, he used to be fast. And he's as determined and as full of heart as they come. That's why I grew to like him here. I really, really did. But. . .
I really do think that having Brendan Shanahan on the team impedes the growth of the young guys. I really do. And not even because I think he invites it. It just seems to happen. When Shanahan came into the fold, he got the first or second line minutes, depending on what line Tom Renney chose to create that week. He got top unit play on the Powerplay, despite the team's absolute and utter inability to not only score with the man advantage but to look like they had any chance in hell of scoring on it. When Shanny played on the PP, guys that had been successful and shown results on the Powerplay, like one Petr Prucha, took a back seat. Those are facts. I'm not trying to make a direct correlation between the two, but I mean fact remains that if one guy plays that role and takes that ice time, that's one less guy that there is room for to play that same role, if you are following me.
Now, if Shanahan were to say that he wanted to play the minutes of a fourth liner, do some time on the penalty kill, where he is very effective, and win some games with those nice shootout goals, I am all for that. Sign him up, let him keep his A, and I can go home happy.
My problem, is I don't believe it will go down like that. I want to, but I can't. If Shanny makes the team it won't be long before he's somehow managed to end up on the 2nd or 1st line. And it won't be long until he's managed to end up on the one-has-to-assume-it-will-be-better-than-last-year-but-these-are-the-New-York-Rangers-so-you-never-know Powerplay. Seriously, I'm not a psychic, but this is how I see it playing out.
And that upsets me. This is, more than probably, Shanahan's last season in the league. A marvelous guy with a marvelous career. And he should have had a more fairy-tale ending than the dismal and disappointing second round beating at the hands of Pittsburgh. He should have. And honestly, I wouldn't have appreciated him if he had not come to New York because I short-sidedly did not like Detroit so I never paid attention to him and the many great players that played there. I accept that, and part of me regrets it. And Shannahan's coming to NY helped resurrect that. I'm glad he came to NY because I got to see one of the true talents in this league night in, night out. And as for a guy - he is a great guy. I was there the day he and Mike Knuble had their unfortunate collision on Garden ice. The place was silent. I know he has the respect of everyone - fans, coaches, media, teammates. I'm saying all this, but that still might not mean enough in the end.
What my concern comes down to is that we're looking at a guy who is saying he's rested, refreshed, and ready to go. But he's still 39 years old. We are all not Gordie Howe. Honestly, really, we aren't. Shanahan, and yes the untimely and unfortunate concussion and knee injury had a lot to do with this, sure, lost a lot of his steps in the time following 2/17/07. He did. And I'll be honest with you, if I knew he was going to take a lesser roll (AND that the coaching staff would be both willing and forceful to that end) I'd really want him on the team.
But the thought of him taking a spot from some young guy who has played with the team before like Prucha, or some young guy like Korpikoski who has been waiting in the wings (literally) for years, upsets me. Because the bottom line is that it's not just a matter of him taking a roster spot for a year. Which is what it would be. It's the fact that they might have to TRADE one of these guys to make room to KEEP him. That's why I am mad. Because then, regardless of the other concerns I've just mentioned, you are now shuffling a team, a team you've already mantled and dismantled and who knows what the freak-antled they've done now, for a guy that will play, at most, a year, and at best, at full strength for half the year.
For he will slow down. It's inevitable. And not at the price of a roster spot for a year. But at the price of some guys that will have to be traded. And they'll be traded away and, if history repeats, go on to play good roles on other teams. (The Rangers do not have a good track record of handling youth, let me tell you). So he'll be here, at the price of these guys that have worked their way up the system and been waiting, waiting as patiently as the rest of us for the Rangers promised youth movement. Oh and no, ladies and gentlemen, it is not 1998. It's 2008. The Rangers have been dis-re-freak-antling their team for a decade now. And youth was promised. And youth was rarely delivered. Now I'm already not happy with the excess of salary money being tied up in four guys and I've made that clear. Jagr is gone. Straka is gone. I think it's the ONLY time for this team to truly embrace the youth. Honestly, it might be now or never. And if that means no Shanahan, I'm sorry, but my vote, is for no Shanahan.
Now, whether Brendan Shanahan comes back or not, I have no choice. But if he plays, I will hope and cheer and pray with all I have in me that he has a monster of a season on Broadway this year. Not to start the season, not to end the season, but this whole year. I will sincerely hope that I was completely and utterly wrong with my above assessment. Because then, and only then, if he looks into the eyes of the Rangers fans and of his former teammates (whomever gets traded away to make his last year on this team a reality), can he say it was truly worth it.
If not, he owes quite a few people an apology. Myself included.
**Author's note. Brendan Shanahan has been a truly classy, talented and professional player and person in this league for a long time. I want that to be clear. The above is merely my opinion. I do not indend for it to take anything away from a guy I completely respect.**
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
