Jump to content

Photo

Rags Sign Shanny


  • Please log in to reply
64 replies to this topic

#21 ice dog

ice dog

    Head Coach

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,044 posts

Posted 09 July 2006 - 12:17 PM

Also, he pushed Shanny to show some toughness in his game and Shanny wasn't much interested in that anymore, either, he wanted to float around in the offensive zone and wait for the one-timer. Now, when he did what Babcock asked, he was actually very effective and, as people have noted, had a very good year. He just didn't really want to do it.



i guess he's kind of like the old elephant going to the graveyard to die...lol!
  • 0
"Wendy...I'm home."
-Jack Torrance
Sherry Ross ‏@SherryDarlingNJ
"Little did we know the C on Parise's jersey stood for "C-ya, suckers!" Yes, I was fooled. And it is the collusion vibe that taints it."

#22 Succubus

Succubus

    Prospect

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 107 posts

Posted 09 July 2006 - 12:18 PM

I like this move. For one year, it's fine. But the price is one million too much. Say what you will about Shanahan but he still has something left in the tank and can add some much needed grit to a Ranger team which was way too soft this past Spring. And still has that great one-timer which can become an added dimension to their predictable power play.

I also think it's nice to get a North American player who has Cup experience and knows what it takes to win. You put him on the second line with Cullen and Prucha and suddenly the dynamic changes.

Maybe even Prucha plays 3rd line which would make them even more difficult to play. That would give them a heck of a lot more balance than the predictable shadow job every team employed at the end.


Can't stress enough his locker room presence. The Rangers might have had a different post season and brought more woe to the Devils if they'd had someone like Shanny on their bench.
  • 0

#23 Triumph

Triumph

    A Legend

  • Mod
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 27,420 posts

Posted 09 July 2006 - 12:19 PM

Shanahan isn't the power forward he was in the 90s - he floats and avoids contact now, so he should fit right in on the Rangers. He'll add some scoring pop to the lineup, but it will be interesting to see how much. Of all the Red Wings I just got the sense through the Wings' latest playoff failures that he above all the lifelong Wings lacks the passion. He's probably good for 25 goals, maybe 30.
  • 0

http://drivingplay.blogspot.com - The blog with three first lines
 


#24 annabelle

annabelle

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,413 posts

Posted 09 July 2006 - 03:54 PM

I wish nonis woulda gotten shanny, ah well, it's going to be strange to see him in a rags jersey
  • 0
This post was brought to you by the letters, D, P & H

"I wasn't trying to be funny. If I was you would have noticed because you'd be laughing.."-C.G 04/14/07

"The winters of my childhood were long, long seasons. we lived in three places, the school, the church, and the skating rink. But our real life was on the skating rink" (from the back of the 5 Dollar bill, proof that Canada IS hockey country..)

Loyalty above all, Save honour

15 seconds left, your team is down a goal...Are YOU in the parking lot or still in the stands?

OFFICIAL MEMBER OF Team Awesome.ca...KEEPING MANITOBA AWESOME!!!!

"FLAMES FANS- the new generation of the 90's Leaf fans, naive and stupid with no actual hockey intelligence..(which is expected when 80% of your fanbase are bandwagoners who started watching April 2004)"- PureTalent#19

Keeper of the Sprite in Marty's water bottle
Posted Image

#25 bruins4777

bruins4777

    General Manager

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,977 posts

Posted 09 July 2006 - 04:45 PM

shanny chokes everyplayoffs, it's expected.
  • 0
Posted Image


Hahahaha...long overdue. Now they need to get rid of Jacobs.


The problem is, NJ only plays them 4 times a year. We were only able to get them to trade JT and fire the idiot GM. If we played them 8 times a year, maybe Jacobs might have an epiphany and sell the team.


#26 MantaRay

MantaRay

    A Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,260 posts

Posted 09 July 2006 - 06:01 PM

They obviously feel that with some secondary scoring help, they can improve on last season. You don't commit longterm to a player that age. One year is sensible cause it gives guys like Dawes, Dubinsky and Korpikoski time to develop. Out of those three, Dawes is probably the most NHL ready and could still make the team. But he's not starting out on a top 2 line. That's just not realistic. You don't hand out roster spots to unproven rookies. They have to be earned like Prucha did last year.


By your logic and based on his play last season: You don't hand out roster spots to unproven rookies...like Prucha, but since Shanahan has been in the league, won't play physical or play defense...he gets a spot because your paying him $4 million a year?

I am happy about this signing because it helps us.
  • 0
I was wrong to ever doubt the powers of Lou Lamoriello.
IN LOU WE TRUST @Manta04


Posted Image

#27 Jerrydevil

Jerrydevil

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,900 posts

Posted 09 July 2006 - 08:01 PM

I love to goof on the Rangers' ineptitude, but I don't have anything bad to say about this one. Good signing.
  • 0

#28 section 110

section 110

    Senior Devil

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 938 posts

Posted 09 July 2006 - 09:24 PM

They obviously feel that with some secondary scoring help, they can improve on last season. You don't commit longterm to a player that age. One year is sensible cause it gives guys like Dawes, Dubinsky and Korpikoski time to develop. Out of those three, Dawes is probably the most NHL ready and could still make the team. But he's not starting out on a top 2 line. That's just not realistic. You don't hand out roster spots to unproven rookies. They have to be earned like Prucha did last year.



Overall, a good signing by them. He's durable, plays a ton of minutes, gets on the PP, and can be a big help to the younger guys. Someone to look up to.

On the down side, he is 37, and has been injury prone given his style of play. Also takes more PIMs than a coach would like.

regarding your prucha comment, the kid needs to prove himself this year - last year playing along side Jagr for a good part of the season doesn't mean he is ready to be a consistent top scorer for them
  • 0
Posted Image

Official NJDevs.com keeper of....CAA's Section 110 (for the first 25 years) and The Rock's Section 5 22 (for the next 25 years and beyond)

#29 bruins4777

bruins4777

    General Manager

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,977 posts

Posted 09 July 2006 - 10:23 PM

prucha didn't play with jagr that much...i'm pretty sure his super streak was on the powerplay and on the 2nd/3rd line, i might be wrong though.
  • 0
Posted Image


Hahahaha...long overdue. Now they need to get rid of Jacobs.


The problem is, NJ only plays them 4 times a year. We were only able to get them to trade JT and fire the idiot GM. If we played them 8 times a year, maybe Jacobs might have an epiphany and sell the team.


#30 section 110

section 110

    Senior Devil

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 938 posts

Posted 09 July 2006 - 10:38 PM

prucha didn't play with jagr that much...i'm pretty sure his super streak was on the powerplay and on the 2nd/3rd line, i might be wrong though.



Derek would know - but I'll stand by my belief that he still needs to prove his mettle as a threat in the coming year.
  • 0
Posted Image

Official NJDevs.com keeper of....CAA's Section 110 (for the first 25 years) and The Rock's Section 5 22 (for the next 25 years and beyond)

#31 bruins4777

bruins4777

    General Manager

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,977 posts

Posted 09 July 2006 - 10:41 PM

ya, i guess waiting for derek works much more.

But even so...i mean, to what degree do you feel a 2nd year player needs to prove himself?
  • 0
Posted Image


Hahahaha...long overdue. Now they need to get rid of Jacobs.


The problem is, NJ only plays them 4 times a year. We were only able to get them to trade JT and fire the idiot GM. If we played them 8 times a year, maybe Jacobs might have an epiphany and sell the team.


#32 Triumph

Triumph

    A Legend

  • Mod
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 27,420 posts

Posted 09 July 2006 - 10:50 PM

Derek would know - but I'll stand by my belief that he still needs to prove his mettle as a threat in the coming year.


He was on the PP with Jagr - 16 power play goals. His shooting percentage was 23% - unsustainable over a career. The Rangers will have to be happy next year if Prucha can score 30-35 in a full season, and they'll want him to double his shots on goal at least.
  • 0

http://drivingplay.blogspot.com - The blog with three first lines
 


#33 section 110

section 110

    Senior Devil

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 938 posts

Posted 09 July 2006 - 10:58 PM

ya, i guess waiting for derek works much more.

But even so...i mean, to what degree do you feel a 2nd year player needs to prove himself?



i'm just saying that this guy doesn't have the flash yet to be a consistent 30 goal scorer (though this is the "new" NHL). being on his own line with wingers not named Jagr will undoubtedly impact his production. Plus, with Shanahan taking up more PP minutes, Prucha could very well see his PP time cut.
  • 0
Posted Image

Official NJDevs.com keeper of....CAA's Section 110 (for the first 25 years) and The Rock's Section 5 22 (for the next 25 years and beyond)

#34 bruins4777

bruins4777

    General Manager

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,977 posts

Posted 09 July 2006 - 11:40 PM

prucha doesn't have the "flash" to be a consistent 30 goal scorer? are you serious? the kid's shot is sick. his hands are soft as butter to boot along with great wheels. his potential is outstanding. flash is his game.
  • 0
Posted Image


Hahahaha...long overdue. Now they need to get rid of Jacobs.


The problem is, NJ only plays them 4 times a year. We were only able to get them to trade JT and fire the idiot GM. If we played them 8 times a year, maybe Jacobs might have an epiphany and sell the team.


#35 Derek21

Derek21

    A Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,840 posts

Posted 10 July 2006 - 12:37 AM

shanny chokes everyplayoffs, it's expected.



That's wrong. Check the years when Detroit won the Cup. He was pretty darn productive the first two. Not sure about 2002.

By your logic and based on his play last season: You don't hand out roster spots to unproven rookies...like Prucha, but since Shanahan has been in the league, won't play physical or play defense...he gets a spot because your paying him $4 million a year?

I am happy about this signing because it helps us.



Just like how an injury prone Alexander Mogilny and Vlad Malakhov were handed spots by your team. Just a friendly fyi Scoop!

Derek would know - but I'll stand by my belief that he still needs to prove his mettle as a threat in the coming year.



Of course he has to prove himself. He did it one year. But he was going to be a lock for 40 before his injury against the Flyers. Afterwards, he wasn't as effective. I will be curious to see how much he bulks up. If he adds strength, combined with skill and work ethic, he could be lethal.


And btw, most of his goals came playing 2nd line or on the PP.

He was on the PP with Jagr - 16 power play goals. His shooting percentage was 23% - unsustainable over a career. The Rangers will have to be happy next year if Prucha can score 30-35 in a full season, and they'll want him to double his shots on goal at least.



The last part on the SOG is the biggest thing in my book. This guy has great hands and is very difficult to handle one-on-one. It's not like he can't finish without JJ. He's not a selfish kid.

i'm just saying that this guy doesn't have the flash yet to be a consistent 30 goal scorer (though this is the "new" NHL). being on his own line with wingers not named Jagr will undoubtedly impact his production. Plus, with Shanahan taking up more PP minutes, Prucha could very well see his PP time cut.



Depends what they opt to do. Maybe stick him up front with Jagr and Nylander. And team Straka and Rachunek at the point.

I see Shanny playing with Cullen more than Jagr. Though they could opt for Shanny to play left side making that dangerous one-timer option pass out for Jagr.

Either way, the PP will get a boost. Both units will be bolstered.
  • 0

"The greatest trick Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist."

 

Hasan, Brian and I blog at New York Puck. Devils, Islanders, Rangers and Sabres.


#36 SueNJ97

SueNJ97

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,814 posts

Posted 10 July 2006 - 06:49 AM

If you really want to look for something to be concerned about with Prucha it's not the talent, it's the durability. He can score, it's just that he spent quite a bit of the season taking a pounding and I remember that even Ranger fans were wondering when his body was going to wear down, even before his knee injury his scoring started to slow, I believe. Instead, he wound up with a knee injury, also not a surprise because he was often the target of heavy hits along the boards that he would just manage to escape (he's quite quick and shifty) and in this case, he was trying to avoid the hit, if he had taken the hit straight on, he would have avoided the knee injury.

Back to Shanny...I don't think a one-year contract, even at $4M for a 37-year-old, is necessarily a bad thing. But he had a very good year playing for a coach, Babcock, who made him play a style he didn't want to play anymore and yet he did his best when he actually played the way Babcock wanted him to play, apparently. I can understand that with Yzernam retired and the goaltending situation in Detroit, Montreal and NY might have looked more intriguing. But he had problems with the expectations of the coach in Detroit and he said no to playing for the two guys, Carbonneau and Gainey, that will expect that same sort of responsibilty. I realize that Tom Renney will try to get him to be responsible out there...but I wonder what Sather told him would be expected of him? I'm not laughing at the signing the way some others on the board are, I'm just asking some questions. It does look like Shanahan looked at the three situations and chose the one where HE thinks the GM is most likely to force the coach to give him a pass and let him play the way he wants. I'm not saying that's what will happen but it might not be pretty.

As for Mogilny & Malakhov, Mogilny had played very responsibly and well for NJ in the past. If he had actually been healthy, I'm not sure there would have been a problem. Malakhov is another story altogether. Never liked it, never will, didn't like it even when we traded for him in 2000.

Edited by SueNJ97, 10 July 2006 - 06:50 AM.

  • 0
NJDevs.com Keeper of Lou Lamoriello (until he finds out & kills me that is)

Now that we are going to have a season, I can post these...
2004-2005 NJDevs.com winner of the Brodeur, Lamoriello and Howe awards, thanks guys, I appreciate the hat trick.

#37 Pepperkorn

Pepperkorn

    A Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,396 posts

Posted 10 July 2006 - 08:05 AM

It's worth this risk.. but see - I wonder what he'll do tot he chemistry.

Succubus says he's this amazing locker room presense...so what is this going to do to Jagr? I'm not in the locker room but it's something I'm really curious about -- Jagr appears to me to have some real chemistry sensativity. Shanny should be smart about it -- I'm trying to think how it'll all work together...

Do they work as a team th Czec leader and the NA leader? If Shanny shouts down Jagr or even if he just shouts over his message in a show of support yet still alienates Jagr... I just think it's a chemistry risk.

Honestly with the team developing as it is I wouldn't have done this... it's too old school rangers and too easy for players to bail on them as they always have in the past...to easy for it to become a ship with too many thus no rudder. To me it's too easily interpreted as impatience. But I can see how it could work too :noclue: We'll see is all I can think (as always huh?)
  • 0

I'm here for the party


#38 Devils731

Devils731

    A Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,466 posts

Posted 10 July 2006 - 08:20 AM

It's like clockwork, say anything bad about the Rangers and out will come mention of the M's. :giggle:
  • 0
Your unconditional rejection of violence makes you smugly think of yourselves as noble, as enlightened, but in reality it is nothing less than abject moral capitulation to evil. Unconditional rejection of self-defense, because you think its a supposed surrender to violence, leaves you no resort but begging for mercy or offering appeasement.

-Terry Goodkind


Sex Panther cologne -- 50 percent of the time, it works every time.

-Anchorman

The best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago. The second best time is now.

-Anonymous

Keeper of Section 212-213's wayward step

#39 SueNJ97

SueNJ97

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,814 posts

Posted 10 July 2006 - 08:31 AM

It's like clockwork, say anything bad about the Rangers and out will come mention of the M's. :giggle:

Look, they were BAD signings, in retrospect. I don't really blame him for Mogilny so much because Elias was out. He might have been out all year. Nobody knew. But I didn't like the Malakhov signing and I said so at the time. But I think we all know why it happened. Paging Mr. Niedermayer...oh, Mr. Niedermayer????

Lou shows loyalty...which Ranger fans always kick him for being a heartless bastard...and this is what happens, we have Malakhov on the cap for 3.6M this year.

Derek...we know they were bad signings. However, I am not going to automatically give the Rangers a pass for the next 20 years without questioning anything they do because of them. And there are a few things in the Shanny signing which are worth questioning. However, if it will make you feel better, anytime we post something about the Rangers where any of us question anything about the team, we can put this:

"Obligitory M&M contract reference, for Derek". Now, how many years do you want it there for?
  • 0
NJDevs.com Keeper of Lou Lamoriello (until he finds out & kills me that is)

Now that we are going to have a season, I can post these...
2004-2005 NJDevs.com winner of the Brodeur, Lamoriello and Howe awards, thanks guys, I appreciate the hat trick.

#40 bg.

bg.

    Senior Devil

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 619 posts

Posted 10 July 2006 - 09:37 AM

I really do not understand how some of you can really knock this deal, saying how this is a move they made in the past, etc, etc. This isn't 3 years at 5 per, they didn't blow everyone out of the water on July 1 for this...this isn't the contract Brindamour got - I understand that was "thanks for winning the cup" but 5 years to a 35 year-old...nuts.

The one guy the rangers really went after (like the old rangers) was Elias...spending monster dollars to get a guy like that fine, but other than that, one year deals to older F's like Straka and Shanny who both had very good seasons last year makes sense and keeps flexibility going forward.
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users