If that's the cae then so be it. I respect lundquist tremendously, but if losing him to FA can make this team a perennial contender then I say let him go. I would entertain trade proposals if I was the GM. Don't get me wrong, I would love for the rangers to win with lundquist but I want them to win, irregardless to who is the coach or who is on the team.
Confirmed with Link: Head Coach Vacancy Pt III: How's your spelling? (Eakins/Vigneault/Messier/Gretzky)
- Thread starter Crease
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
- Status
If that's the cae then so be it. I respect lundquist tremendously, but if losing him to FA can make this team a perennial contender then I say let him go. I would entertain trade proposals if I was the GM. Don't get me wrong, I would love for the rangers to win with lundquist but I want them to win, irregardless to who is the coach or who is on the team.
This is what I said in a different post about Gretzky. In regards to ruff though, he was in buffalo for a long time and didn't even sniff a championship
Clown Fiesta
Registered User
His choices as to where guys end up are his best guess, the Gretzky stuff came from Gretzky apparently, and he personally doesn't see them hiring Messier. Just another opinion, can take it work a grain of salt I suppose.
But it doesn't seem like anyone really thinks they will hire Messier.
Nac Mac Feegle
wee & free
- Jun 10, 2011
- 35,789
- 10,338
Dreger's best guesses:
Pretty decent for all teams. Eakins would probably be the best fit for a young Edmonton team.
All I know is, as long as Gretzky and Messier are NOT coaching in any capacity, I'll be happy. Talk about a disaster waiting to happen.
Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,357
GregSirico
KakkoSZN
Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,357
LaffyTaffyNYR
Registered User
- Feb 25, 2012
- 17,113
- 2,662
nyrfan519
Registered User
- Jan 10, 2009
- 800
- 0
In 1999 Buffalo made it to the Stanley Cup Finals and lost to a stacked Dallas Stars team in six games, on the infamous Brett Hull crease goal. To me that qualifies as "sniffing" a championship.
Also, look at a guy like Claude Julien. Briefly coaches in Montreal (I think it was one full season that was sandwiched by parts of two others), gets fired, inexplicably gets fired in NJ after coaching a first place team for 95% of the regular season, then doesn't win a Cup in Boston until several seasons into his tenure there.
perennial contender?without Lundqvist?
2014: Suck for Sam (Reinhart)
2015: Crumble for Connor (McDavid)
2 #1 picks propelling the Rangers into legitimate contenders, only by blowing 2 seasons.
LiveLongandProspal
NY Rangers = America's Team
Not that it would work with two icons and their egos clashing, but what about Gretzky as the HC with Messier as an AC?
Highly unlikely with the scouting advancements in today's age.
#1 Forward picks post millenium marks haven't busted at all.
2001: Kovalchuk - Elite
2002: Nash - 1rst line forward
2004: Ovechkin - Elite
2005 - Crosby - Elite
2007 - Kane - Elite
2008 - Stamkos - Elite
2009 - Tavares- Elite
2010 - Hall - Elite
2011 - RNH - Too Early to tell
2012 - Yakupov - Too Early to tell
Call me crazy, but I like our chances with the #1 goalie in the NHL over two draft picks. You're still assuming.
time for a rebuild
I'd easily take any combination of those two over Lundqvist just my opinion.
Not just two draft picks lol. 2 #1 picks that can completely change the complexion of a franchise moving forward.
With Lundqvist, you have a player who is too good and too elite that he drags crap teams into the playoffs. Without Lundqvist, you'll have a crap team battling for #1. #1 picks in today's age guarantee a franchise player to build around. I would rather take my chances with #1 picks moving forward than have Lundqvist constantly drag mediocre teams into early playoff exits. Perpetual mediocrity.
I'd easily take any combination of those two over Lundqvist just my opinion.
Not just two draft picks lol. 2 #1 picks that can completely change the complexion of a franchise moving forward.
With Lundqvist, you have a player who is too good and too elite that he drags crap teams into the playoffs. Without Lundqvist, you'll have a crap team battling for #1. #1 picks in today's age guarantee a franchise player to build around. I would rather take my chances with #1 picks moving forward than have Lundqvist constantly drag mediocre teams into early playoff exits. Perpetual mediocrity.
Player big P
no more striptease no more flashes
Not that it's inaccurate, but you can't imagine my shock that Kershaw ranks every pick as elite except the one who plays for our team.
Or you know, we can have some patience, heal up and see how this new coach works with the team. Sounds a bit more level headed than trading potentially the greatest player in franchise history.
No more Kool-Aid.
This roster is far, far, far below the rosters of the current Final 4. This leads me to believe that the Rangers are many, many years away from competing.
Don't have any confidence in Sather building a winning roster. Post-lockout, he's put up very flawed teams every year with the exception of last season. An anomaly to his 13 yr blemish to this franchise.
Instead of drafting more Chris Kreiders and Michael Del Zottos like they have been, I'd much rather go for the John Tavares lite or Drew Doughty type.
Just my opinion, I don't think this roster, at it's current state, is built to win anything, anytime soon.
No argument there.
I'm really not sure what constitutes a "John Tavares" lite and I don't think it makes much sense to write Kreider off but I didn't expect anything else. Our roster might not be as talented as the remaining teams, but we did make it relatively far being absolutely hammered with injuries.
But I know you and I'm sure you know me by now, so I guess we'll be at a standstill.
No argument there.
I'm really not sure what constitutes a "John Tavares" lite and I don't think it makes much sense to write Kreider off but I didn't expect anything else. Our roster might not be as talented as the remaining teams, but we did make it relatively far being absolutely hammered with injuries.
But I know you and I'm sure you know me by now, so I guess we'll be at a standstill.
The comparison with Kreider and Tavares comes from the fact that the Rangers that season lost in the 1rst round to the Caps. The Isles on the other hand, absolutely blew the whole season. On draft day, the Isles walked away with John Tavares, a franchise altering move, while the Rangers picked up Kreider, an average pick in the 1rst round of the draft. Imagine if say Lundqvist got injured that year and the Rangers ended up in last lol. Add JT to this coup and they're pretty much contenders. This is what I'm trying to get at lol.
So get rid of the guy we haven't been able to build around in the last decade in the hopes to build around one or two new guys with the same owner/gm running things?
You should also understand that the hockey gods say we are not allowed to draft 1st OV. If we should somehow tank and get that pick run to Vegas and bet everything on NYR not having that pick after the draft lotto happens.
The hope is that a 30th place finish is finally enough for Dolan to sweep Sather and Co. out of management.
- Status
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
-
Finland vs Sweden - Centre Bell, MontréalWagers: 3Staked: $387.00Event closes - 2 days from now
- Updated:
-
USA vs Canada- Centre Bell, MontréalWagers: 3Staked: $389.00Event closes - 3 days from now
- Updated:
-