GDT: La Quinta Team Meetings

Status
Not open for further replies.
So you consider anybody writing about the Rangers (or Messier) a bad thing? I just don't get where you're coming from here. Would you prefer a total news blackout on the Rangers? (I know Sather would)

The whole beginning of the conversation was about people complaining about the fact that Sather or whomever don't give interviews. The point being made is that no matter what they say, they won't give any real answers and that the media doesn't care about the truth or writing intelligent hockey articles because they'd rather stir up crap or write about the same nonsense repeatedly in order to sell papers (see Messier for a recent example). I'm not going to argue in circles about this.
 
Seems to me like it bothers you. Of course, you have every right to ignore the articles you do not want to read.

I never said talking about the Rangers bothered me. The recycling of the same inaccurate story does though, when no credibility is there to support it, it bothers me. I never said I hated talking about the Rangers.
 
The whole beginning of the conversation was about people complaining about the fact that Sather or whomever don't give interviews. The point being made is that no matter what they say, they won't give any real answers and that the media doesn't care about the truth or writing intelligent hockey articles because they'd rather stir up crap or write about the same nonsense repeatedly in order to sell papers (see Messier for a recent example). I'm not going to argue in circles about this.

I suppose that's where we differ, then. I don't mind reading speculation and/or opinions about the Rangers, even if I do not agree with it. It's one of the reasons I come to this site...people like you and me giving our opinions...no matter how much we may disagree.

It's better than not reading about the Rangers at all. To each his (or her) own, I suppose.
 
I never said talking about the Rangers bothered me. The recycling of the same inaccurate story does though, when no credibility is there to support it, it bothers me. I never said I hated talking about the Rangers.

Well, just ignore the articles you do not want to read! :)
 
All Sather had to do is come out and say that Messier is not a serious candidate or is not seriously interested in the first place. What's the point in not doing so? He doesn't want to tip the organization's hand? Is any other team chomping at the bit to interview him? Seems to me that this closed door policy is a major reason for all the speculation, not the other way around.
 
All Sather had to do is come out and say that Messier is not a serious candidate or is not seriously interested in the first place. What's the point in not doing so? He doesn't want to tip the organization's hand? Is any other team chomping at the bit to interview him? Seems to me that this closed door policy is a major reason for all the speculation, not the other way around.

Maybe it's Sather's idea. Maybe Messier never considered coaching until Sather came to him with the idea?

Just spitballing here....
 
All Sather had to do is come out and say that Messier is not a serious candidate or is not seriously interested in the first place. What's the point in not doing so? He doesn't want to tip the organization's hand? Is any other team chomping at the bit to interview him? Seems to me that this closed door policy is a major reason for all the speculation, not the other way around.

I think Messier truly is interested and Sather doesnt want to burn any bridges by coming out and saying hes not a serious candidate.

Or, as SBOB said, maybe its Sather's idea regarding Messier - which is equal parts scary and somewhat believable considering his past of terrible decisions.
 
Sather may have a poor track record of hiring coaches, and signing free agents, and I'm sure Gorton has a large role in many of the positive things that Sather does, but let's give him some credit - he makes some damn good trades, post-lockout at least. He's a thief.

He needs to never sign a free agent again though.
 
Rhetorical question here.

Is everyone completely happy with the drafting this team has seen over the last 10 years?

I mean, we do have some very solid players, but still lacking that one legit 1st liner or that offensive catalyst on D seems concerning.

Also, the passivity that permeates most, not all, the drafted players I find alarming.

I guess the real question I have is, what role did and does Gorton have with regards to the players we target at the Drafts?

I see people talk about Gorton's role is how the Bruins look today and think to myself that we are a long ways off from being as physically stubborn as they are. Talent match up may be even, but they have a group of players that get after the game and don't give a frickin inch.

We are nothing like that. So if Gorton has had a big hand in formulating this current team, then I'm not sure I trust him as the GM of this team. Seems like we are going to see more of the same passive personalities getting drafted.

I'd hate that.

The organization has to draft bigger aggressive players if it wants a bigger aggressive team. The fact (no matter who done the drafting for the last 30 years) this organization tends to gravitate to the slight built less aggressive types. Who doesn't wish we had a Barry Beck and Nick Fotiu type on this team. McIlrath has been the greatest anomaly to that trend. God we all hope he turns out to be a player. this team may have toughness(willing to take a hit to make a play) but rarely dish it out.
 
And somehow Prust was an one-of-a-kind irreplaceable player.

Pierre McGuire kept talking about how the Bruins were killing the Rangers on the fourth line. I think that was a bit of a nit as the Bruins were killing the Rangers across the board, to me. But look at that fourth line. Is there a unique player on their fourth line? Not to me.

Maybe they're unique to the rangers roster. I didn't think Prust was that vital but montreal did. Wonder if they're interested in Boyle?
 
All Sather had to do is come out and say that Messier is not a serious candidate or is not seriously interested in the first place. What's the point in not doing so? He doesn't want to tip the organization's hand? Is any other team chomping at the bit to interview him? Seems to me that this closed door policy is a major reason for all the speculation, not the other way around.

and what does sather gain by saying messier isn't a serious candidate? what purpose does it serve? and how does it benefit his search for a head coach by telling the media and fans who he is considering and who he isn't?
 
Or maybe Sather is interested in naming Messier as coach? How do we know when the organization treats all information as classified?

By the way--according to Carp, Gretzky isn't interested in the job, but Messier definitely is.

Because, if the Rangers are really going to buck the trend – they were headed in 2011-12 toward being exactly what Boston is in 2013, and now all of a sudden they want to be the anti-Bruins – and if they are really looking for the anti-Torts, then Bylsma is probably their guy. Bylsma has the opposite personality of John Tortorella, a soft-spoken guy who actually pauses and thinks about the question before he answers, and a guy who—outwardly at least—appears to be much more of a back-patter than a hammer-wielder.

That said, I don’t know where the Rangers are headed because Mark Messier does want the job, and since he does, I’m hard pressed to believe that Glen Sather, who knows Messier for, what, 34-35 years, is not going to give it to him. Sather and Messier obviously have a tremendous relationship, with admiration and loyalty the key words. I can’t imagine Sather wouldn’t hire Messier.

Speaking of which, forget about Wayne Gretzky. He is not really interested in the job. So count him out.

Carp also says Ruff probably won't be hired.
http://rangers.lohudblogs.com/2013/06/08/throw-dan-bylsmas-hat-into-the-rangers-coaching-ring/
 
The fans who had a rally to get the man fired wants to know why he won't talk much to them.......hmmmm :huh:
 
The organization has to draft bigger aggressive players if it wants a bigger aggressive team. The fact (no matter who done the drafting for the last 30 years) this organization tends to gravitate to the slight built less aggressive types. Who doesn't wish we had a Barry Beck and Nick Fotiu type on this team. McIlrath has been the greatest anomaly to that trend. God we all hope he turns out to be a player. this team may have toughness(willing to take a hit to make a play) but rarely dish it out.

No NHL team is intimidated by the New York Rangers.
 
Carp might be the worst Rangers reporter.


like ever.

I'll give Carp kudos for asking asking Slats straight out if he would continue being the GM during the last conference call. You get the sense it's not a love fest between the two of them.
 
It was Andrew Gross who asked that to Sather not Carp.

Weinman is doing Golfer's Digest so he's never coming back.

I can't believe people are trashing Carp here, that guy is a legend on the Rangers beat and used to have a Sunday Column similar to Larry Brooks.

He covered the Rangers from the late 70s until right after the lockout and then Weinman took over. Once Weinman left, Carp took it over again. He didn't have to. Some of Carp's stories are legendary. He witnessed everything from the Sasoon Rangers to Smurfs to Espo to Smith to the Dark Ages to the Revival.

There have been MASSIVE budget cuts up at The Journal News in Westchester County so Carp covering the Rangers is one of about 3 beats he does. They have no budget for road games and half the time he has to do the Yankees/Giants/something else. Be grateful that he keeps an organized blog for people to talk about the Rangers on, still has very relevant information, and gives people a chance to guest blog at times. He does an amazing job for something that is not his primary responsibility with extremely limited budgets and resources.
 
Bare minimum effort as usual. God forbid the team steps outside of the box for a change.

thats why for me if we didnt get AV... i rather Mess then Ruff, just bc its a left field/unexpected move that would be different and unique approach..

i wouldnt mind seeing mess coach as long as he brought in solid assistants to surround himself with.. but who knows.. enough is enough we need a cup!!!!!


NO way glen steps down, but if he does Gorton is the guy that takes over.. thats why he left boston to be in this roll bc he knew he would take over oneday... if that happens we're in solid shape!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad