Marty St. Louis

[Hi ImHFNYR]

Where are they now? Traded for "elite talent". Meanwhile, other teams are letting those players fill important roles with their organization.

All of them? Because that'd be incorrect. Boston traded for Rask, signed Chara. Two key pieces if ever there were any. You're generalizing. It isn't abut whether you draft, trade or sign FA. You have to draft, trade and sign the right ones. Hank, Stepan, kreider, Girardi, Staal, Hagelin, Zuke all drafted or signed as undrafteds. We are letting our homegrown players fill more than enough important roles. If you want to argue that we'd be better off with Bergeron instead of Stepan or Lucic instead of Hagelin I'd understand that.

It's hard to ignore how early on we grabbed McD too and how much of a hand this organization had in developing Boyle. We drafted D. Moore too (although his return was FA based so that disqualifies him).

I understand people not liking the Nash trade or the MSL trade. Especially the Nash trade.

 

[HatTrick Swayze]

All of them? Because that'd be incorrect. Boston traded for Rask, signed Chara. Two key pieces if ever there were any. You're generalizing. It isn't abut whether you draft, trade or sign FA. You have to draft, trade and sign the right ones. Hank, Stepan, kreider, Girardi, Staal, Hagelin, Zuke all drafted or signed as undrafteds.

It's hard to ignore how early on we grabbed McD too and how much of a hand this organization had in developing Boyle. We drafted D. Moore too (although his return was FA based so that disqualifies him).

I understand people not liking the Nash trade or the MSL trade. Especially the Nash trade.

Rask qualifies as "traded for" just as much as McDonagh. Chara, sure that's one. How about the rest of their core? Lucic, Bergeron, Krejci. Kessel->Seguin/Hamilton->Eriksson/Smith/Fraser?

 

[Fletch]

Singn'..

I do agree. The team seems to play small. It's not always about a punishing hit, although every once in a while that is nice, it's about getting those second chances from in close, or winning battles in front of the net. To be honest, I saw those issues with Rangers in years past. It's that ability to bring up the level of intensity that has plagued them, in my opinion, in later rounds, against better teams. I look back to the '94 team and see guys who took it to that level, from the back of the net to the other end. You don't see that here (and sometimes, not even in net). St. Louis was expected to be that guy. Not sure it's debatable whether or not he is at this point, although seems as though they need more than just one guy.

 

[Gardner McKay]

How about the draft picks used to acquire Nash and MSL? Those are pretty key pieces as well.
I am pretty sure that I made myself clear. The Nash trade and the MSL trade undid what was being built as a solid foundation.

we are a tired team, but the rest is excuses. Who is calling for a blowup?

This is ridiculous. You have no idea if those picks will ever have panned out to be anything.

We replaced those players.

 

[True Blue]

This is ridiculous. You have no idea if those picks will ever have panned out to be anything.

No, but with them, there are better chances of prospects panning out than without them.

We replaced those players.

Who did we replace?

 

[Gardner McKay]

Rask qualifies as "traded for" just as much as McDonagh. Chara, sure that's one. How about the rest of their core? Lucic, Bergeron, Krejci. Kessel->Seguin/Hamilton->Eriksson/Smith/Fraser?

They signed Chara. We signed Girardi. We signed Stralman. We drafted Staal, Stepan, Hagelin, Kreider. Traded Gaborik for Brassard, Moore, Dorsett. Boston turned Kessel (a 5th overall pick) into what you described above. We haven't had any 5th overall picks. The highest pick this team has had since the 2004 lock out was a pick we absolutely ****ed up. What would this team be like with Taraseno or Fowler?

 

[Wamsutta]

That McIlrath pick looks worse every year that goes by.

 

[HatTrick Swayze]

They signed Chara. We signed Girardi. We signed Stralman. We drafted Staal, Stepan, Hagelin, Kreider. Traded Gaborik for Brassard, Moore, Dorsett. Boston turned Kessel (a 5th overall pick) into what you described above. We haven't had any 5th overall picks. The highest pick this team has had since the 2004 lock out was a pick we absolutely ****ed up. What would this team be like with Taraseno or Fowler?

Again, core to core. Forwards. Rangers brought the majority of their "key pieces" up front in externally. As they always have. Boston did not. They have had Bergeron, Krejci, Lucic for the entirety of their primes. Could have had Kessel/Seguin but opted for a ton of depth. Rangers best home grown comparables (that they will have for the entirety of their primes) are Stepan, Hagelin, MZA, Kreider. It's a stark contrast.

And that's just Boston. We can go down the rosters of the other real competitors too. I just don't get how this is still being debated. We've seen it proven for the last 20 years. More actually. But I am 27.

Draft picks do not guarentee ANYTHING. But the best way to build a 5-10 year contender is a solid development pipeline which you acquire by hitting the picks you have. And you need a 5+ year window because a lot of the SC playoffs is luck and timing when it comes to matchups and injuries.

 

[HatTrick Swayze]

That McIlrath pick looks worse every year that goes by.

Wasn't gonna open that one up but it really really does. 2010 draft is looking damn good. I was livid at the time. Came to accept it. Getting tougher by the day.

 

[Jersey Girl]

Wasn't gonna open that one up but it really really does. 2010 draft is looking damn good. I was livid at the time. Came to accept it. Getting tougher by the day.

I am all over this board that day and week saying we should have drafted Fowler, Tarasenko or Gormley. I got two out of three right, with the third incomplete for now.

McIlrath? I'll say the same thing I've been saying for four years - I'll be happy to be proven wrong.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

This is ridiculous. You have no idea if those picks will ever have panned out to be anything.

We replaced those players.

Thats news to me.

More like the team robbed Peter to pay Paul. The pendulum swing wildly from heart and soul to skill, but the results are in neutral.

 

[JCrusher*]

That McIlrath pick looks worse every year that goes by.

I like Mcilrath and hsi toughness BUT i dotn know how the hell he was a top 10 pick. Other than his toughness/fighting ability eh isnt much of a defenseman

 

[Gardner McKay]

Again, core to core. Forwards. Rangers brought the majority of their "key pieces" up front in externally. As they always have. Boston did not. They have had Bergeron, Krejci, Lucic for the entirety of their primes. Could have had Kessel/Seguin but opted for a ton of depth. Rangers best home grown comparables (that they will have for the entirety of their primes) are Stepan, Hagelin, MZA, Kreider. It's a stark contrast.

And that's just Boston. We can go down the rosters of the other real competitors too. I just don't get how this is still being debated. We've seen it proven for the last 20 years. More actually. But I am 27.

Draft picks do not guarentee ANYTHING. But the best way to build a 5-10 year contender is a solid development pipeline which you acquire by hitting the picks you have. And you need a 5+ year window because a lot of the SC playoffs is luck and timing when it comes to matchups and injuries.

Right. We swung and miss on the best opportunity we have had in years. A T R U E offensive defenseman who can run a power play or a first line power forward who will easily pot 25 goals. By the same token, we have had a lot of hits as well. People neglect to see that.

It is easy to keep debating it. The other were created by the tank and draft in the top 3 for 4-5 years model. St. Louis by drafting Johnson (then trading him for more depth) & Pietrangelo. St. Louis has had some other great hits but do you think they are the same team with out Piets? Hell no. Chicago with Toews & Kane (although I would be remiss to not mention that they don't win either cup without Marian Hossa and... wait for it... he was a FA signing). Colorado with Duchene, Mackinnon, Landeskog. Stanksburgh by drafting Crosby & Malkin. Tampa with Stamkos and Hedman.

Go down the list any further and you will find teams built closer to our mold. I can debate you on it all day. Boston is one example of a team who built a winner without tanking. Again, they did have a top 5 pick which they hit big on and then were forced to trade him because of cap issues. They bent over Toronto in that trade.

So again, outside of Boston & the Ducks (Bobby Ryan was a top 3 pick and Getzlaf/Perry were money picks in the deepest draft in the last 30 years (( another draft which we botched btw)) ) every other team has been a bottom feeder for at least 2-3 years.

 

[Gardner McKay]

Thats news to me.

More like the team robbed Peter to pay Paul. The pendulum swing wildly from heart and soul to skill, but the results are in neutral.

So then what is every one *****ing about?

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

So then what is every one *****ing about?

Because I thought the goal was to get better. Besides, I say neutral with a grain of salt because if this season ends against Pittsburgh, the book can be closed on this team rivaling '11-12.

They had a good thing going back then. Sure, that team was limited, but so is this one. A nip here and tuck there to improve the goal scoring would've gone a long way -- build on a foundation.

Instead Sather began a 2 year journey of tearing down that team by acquiring perhaps the softest player in the league during a Captain Ahab-like fixation.

 

[Jersey Girl]

I like Mcilrath and hsi toughness BUT i dotn know how the hell he was a top 10 pick. Other than his toughness/fighting ability eh isnt much of a defenseman

Many posters in the draft thread (and perhaps still today) believed McIlrath was going to be a meaner, tougher version of Jeff Beukeboom. Time will tell - and it's starting to tell.

 

[Blueshirt Special]

Uh, I beg to differ on the "dark years" reference.

We left the dark years behind a long time ago. This organization has consistently made the playoffs for a number of years noiw, made it to the 2nd round a FEW times and one ECF. OK that's not stellar, but that is close to contending for the SCF. Close. (Not defending Sather. Wanted him gone years ago, and yes success that has come has come as much in spite of him as it has because of him.)

The point is this: It's a lot harder to get over the hump than it is to just climb up out of the cellar and sooner or later you have to take a real shot. The window will close. We don't have any top 5 picks. No miracles in waiting.

May not happen this year, but we could be positioned for it next year. Win tomorrow night and this series is up for grabs. It can be done.

 

[Trxjw]

Outside of the Rick Nash trade, what key pieces have we traded? At the same time I would argue that guys like Stepan, Staal, Hagelin are at worst somewhat key pieces. Montreal traded a key piece to us in McDonagh. We found Girardi. What about Stralman? Boyle has been a damn good player for us. Too bad we didn't have the 3rd rounder we traded for him as I am sure the pick would have turned into a franchise altering player. I don't think any one will argue with the Klein for Del Zotto trade. What about the Gaborik trade where we recouped some serious depth?

Just because we didn't draft them you act as if they don't exist or are not important. You are seeing this as you want to see it rather than how it actually is. So again, other than the Nash trade (where we we did give up roster players) and the St. Louis trade where we gave up draft picks and a guy we weren't going to re sign anyway, what exactly are you trying to say? It seems as if you are using two trades as the basis of this notion that we have been doing it for the last 10 years.

We are a tired team that has been hosed by the NHL schedule makers. Just because we lost the last two, it isn't cause for blowing the team up or any other equally ridiculous idea.

So I say we've had issues drafting key pieces out of the 2nd round and beyond, and you counter it with "we signed and traded for a lot of guys, plus we drafted Staal"? Out of that entire rant, you managed to list two players who actually fit into the context of the point I made.

The Rangers took the most successful team they've had in ages, and traded two key pieces for another player who came in and fell well short of expectations. They then proceeded to dismantle it so they could replace the depth that they dealt away with inferior players. You can harp on the idea that they only made those two trades, but two trades sent away 3 of the most successful draft picks this team has made in the last 10 years. 3 guys who loved playing here, gave 100% every game, and helped this team to the best finish we've seen since Sather arrived. Now we're left with a guy who never steps up when it matters, and a guy who is looking every bit of 38 and hasn't registered a point since game 2 of the first round.

I'll certainly argue the Del Zotto trade, simply because it's evidence of this team's inability to sell high on a depreciating asset. They dealt a 23 year old defender at quite possibly the lowest his value had ever been.

The team might be tired now, but they sure as hell didn't look much better in round one.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Uh, I beg to differ on the "dark years" reference.

We left the dark years behind a long time ago. This organization has consistently made the playoffs for a number of years noiw, made it to the 2nd round a FEW times and one ECF. OK that's not stellar, but that is close to contending for the SCF. Close. (Not defending Sather. Wanted him gone years ago, and yes success that has come has come as much in spite of him as it has because of him.)

The point is this: It's a lot harder to get over the hump than it is to just climb up out of the cellar and sooner or later you have to take a real shot. The window will close. We don't have any top 5 picks. No miracles in waiting.

May not happen this year, but we could be positioned for it next year. Win tomorrow night and this series is up for grabs. It can be done.

I've seen a lot of tendencies from the dark years creeping into Sather's mentality over the past 2 years, thats for sure.

Henrik Lundqvist and Ryan McDonagh can hide a lot of warts, fortunately.

 

[HatTrick Swayze]

Right. We swung and miss on the best opportunity we have had in years. A T R U E offensive defenseman who can run a power play or a first line power forward who will easily pot 25 goals. By the same token, we have had a lot of hits as well. People neglect to see that.

It is easy to keep debating it. The other were created by the tank and draft in the top 3 for 4-5 years model. St. Louis by drafting Johnson (then trading him for more depth) & Pietrangelo. St. Louis has had some other great hits but do you think they are the same team with out Piets? Hell no. Chicago with Toews & Kane (although I would be remiss to not mention that they don't win either cup without Marian Hossa and... wait for it... he was a FA signing). Colorado with Duchene, Mackinnon, Landeskog. Stanksburgh by drafting Crosby & Malkin. Tampa with Stamkos and Hedman.

Go down the list any further and you will find teams built closer to our mold. I can debate you on it all day. Boston is one example of a team who built a winner without tanking. Again, they did have a top 5 pick which they hit big on and then were forced to trade him because of cap issues. They bent over Toronto in that trade.

So again, outside of Boston & the Ducks (Bobby Ryan was a top 3 pick and Getzlaf/Perry were money picks in the deepest draft in the last 30 years (( another draft which we botched btw)) ) every other team has been a bottom feeder for at least 2-3 years.

I mean, at the end of the day I agree with much of what you're writing here. But view it in a slightly different way. If the majority of the consistent contenders acquired their core pieces via the draft...wouldn't that be a wise blueprint to follow? Wouldn't that have the highest liklihood of producing sustained success?

Put another way...what recent Cup winner, or Cup finalist acquired their top forwards via UFA or a trade in their late 20s/30s? If anything I view that as an absolute way to NOT go. I am not saying you CAN NEVER sign or trade for a big piece. Hossa is a perfect example. When he is brought in to complement Toews/Kane/Sharp, great. When Gabby is brought in to ride shotgun with Kopitar, great.

And last thing I would never say the Rangers have produced NO homegrown talent. Obviously they have. But it's not "Cup core" caliber. At least of it is going to be (Stepan, MZA, Kreider) it has some steps left to take. Is that a high expectation? Yes. Unfair? Maybe, I don't believe so. Just my 2 cents.

 

[NYR Viper]

I've seen a lot of tendencies from the dark years creeping into Sather's mentality over the past 2 years, thats for sure.

Henrik Lundqvist and Ryan McDonagh can hide a lot of warts, fortunately.

Or unfortunately. Imagine where this team would have been without those 2 this season.

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

I've seen a lot of tendencies from the dark years creeping into Sather's mentality over the past 2 years, thats for sure.

Henrik Lundqvist and Ryan McDonagh can hide a lot of warts, fortunately.

This organization is playing fast and loose when it comes to dealing picks. Yet right now, there's really not a prospect in the organization that you can point to and say, "that guy is going to make an impact for this team soon."

Miller has been penciled into the big club, yet can't stick.

Fast made the team but couldn't stick.

Lindberg was mentioned last year as being a possible a possible Ranger.

Kristo doesn't seem to be ready.

Awfully dangerous territory when you can't reach down and grab cheap, controllable talent. Even more dangerous when you're not getting anywhere near what you expected to get from the players you dealt those assets for.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

This organization is playing fast and loose when it comes to dealing picks. Yet right now, there's really not a prospect in the organization that you can point to and say, "that guy is going to make an impact for this team soon."

Miller has been penciled into the big club, yet can't stick.

Fast made the team but couldn't stick.

Lindberg was mentioned last year as being a possible a possible Ranger.

Kristo doesn't seem to be ready.

Awfully dangerous territory when you can't reach down and grab cheap, controllable talent. Even more dangerous when you're not getting anywhere near what you expected to get from the players you dealt those assets for.

Agreed, and if this team really is in "win now" mode, wouldn't it make more sense to deal these guys for established NHL'ers, pocket the picks, and hope the picks pan out in a few years?

What happens if/when the guys above don't work out AND the organization is short on picks?

 

[pld459666]

Uh, I beg to differ on the "dark years" reference.

We left the dark years behind a long time ago. This organization has consistently made the playoffs for a number of years noiw, made it to the 2nd round a FEW times and one ECF. OK that's not stellar, but that is close to contending for the SCF. Close. (Not defending Sather. Wanted him gone years ago, and yes success that has come has come as much in spite of him as it has because of him.)

The point is this: It's a lot harder to get over the hump than it is to just climb up out of the cellar and sooner or later you have to take a real shot. The window will close. We don't have any top 5 picks. No miracles in waiting.

May not happen this year, but we could be positioned for it next year. Win tomorrow night and this series is up for grabs. It can be done.

The dark years were created by pissing away draft picks and young players in favor of older stars that shined brightest on their former teams.

We are not yet at that stage, but those dark years were created when the Rangers were winning a cup followed by a Conference finals showing in 96-97

the dark years are slow to manifest themselves, it starts when you look at the farm system and see it for the shallow pool of warm piss that it is

 

[NYR Viper]

Agreed, and if this team really is in "win now" mode, wouldn't it make more sense to deal these guys for established NHL'ers, pocket the picks, and hope the picks pan out in a few years?

What happens if/when the guys above don't work out AND the organization is short on picks?

Yes, that would make more sense. This is Sather though...