LaffyTaffyNYR
Registered User
- Feb 25, 2012
- 17,113
- 2,662
Marty St. Louis
- Thread starter Killem Dafoe
- 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
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=82411027&postcount=830
Read through that thread for the lulz.
I mean, I said it at the time, but the Rangers traded for the best winger in the world. And easily a top 10, maybe top 5 player in the game. All in exchange for a 3rd line player and 2 draft picks! You make that move any day of the week!
And the repercussions associated with dealing away futures is quite important, but that mentality has to be used with context. It was very appropriate at the time to add MSL to an already lethal lineup and Callahan was nowhere near a fit in AV's system. Sometimes, especially in sports, you gotta take risks. Sather took a big one here and it has paid off.
Read through that thread for the lulz.
I mean, I said it at the time, but the Rangers traded for the best winger in the world. And easily a top 10, maybe top 5 player in the game. All in exchange for a 3rd line player and 2 draft picks! You make that move any day of the week!
And the repercussions associated with dealing away futures is quite important, but that mentality has to be used with context. It was very appropriate at the time to add MSL to an already lethal lineup and Callahan was nowhere near a fit in AV's system. Sometimes, especially in sports, you gotta take risks. Sather took a big one here and it has paid off.
Last edited:
A very select few posters spammed this board for weeks after we acquired one of the most talented players around, in the midst of a great season, coming off an art ross trophy. It was certainly a head scratcher. Odds are they are still trying to drum up some scenario in which this will all turn into a Greek tragedy.
slipknottin
Registered User
Im still not sold on the trade.
Winning the cup justifies it, anything short of that means it was a trade for the now that didnt get them to what they wanted.
Winning the cup justifies it, anything short of that means it was a trade for the now that didnt get them to what they wanted.
broadwayblue
Registered User
At some point you have to go for it. Early returns show it was worth it. Those picks wouldn't have helped our team for 3 or 4 years, assuming they even panned out. I'm not one to endorse dealing 1st round picks...but considering they will be at the end of the round and we are in win now mode I'm ok with it.
slipknottin
Registered User
I still would much rather build a team that can compete for it every year, than sell out for a one or two year shot.
But like I said, if they win it all, then anything leading up to it was worth it.
They need to do a great job with their mid-late round picks, or in about 5 years the rangers will be in trouble. JMHO
Compete for it every year? When were we actually going to be "competing" for it? 3 or 4 years from now when those picks are possibly ready to contribute, when Lundqvist could be on the downswing and the team could look radically different?
You seem to be assuming that trading those picks means we're not going to be competitive in the future. Where does that come from? Five years from now is a long time. None of us have any idea what the team will look like then. We have an opportunity this season, and Slats went all in. Good on him.
Are two late first round picks really going to be the difference between this team being successful or struggling in a few years? I really, really doubt it.
slipknottin
Registered User
Every time its "we need to do it before this guy gets old"
Rangers have been competing for the cup pretty consistently the past few years, and they are again now. But you keep moving young things for older things, you lose your future hopes.
JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK
Twenty f*ckin years
- Oct 8, 2010
- 80,069
- 17,709
I'd rather go to the finals and lose than not make this trade and keep the picks.
slipknottin
Registered User
Except building a team that can "compete every year" isn't necessarily something that happens...you can give yourself a window and maybe extend it sure but there are no guarantees, and just because you can compete for it doesn't mean you'll win it (ask the St Louis Blues). I think the Rangers can still be competitive for awhile with this team but if magically this year is their best year to win it then hey...
How does our future look? Would it look markedly better with two picks in the 25-30 range? Is that really what's preventing future glory?
slipknottin
Registered User
Theres something to be said for that. But like I said, selling future aspects/values to win now means either you win now, or you win never.
Killem Dafoe
Hold my baby, man.
When that guy is your star goaltender who has been the face of the franchise for the past 9 years, yeah, I think you can say that.
slipknottin
Registered User
4 in a row of none of them? Yes I would say that could be an extremely significant part of the team going forward.
slipknottin
Registered User
Theres always someone.
Lundqvist retires then a guy like McD is the face of the franchise for 9 years... Thats just how it goes.
Clown Fiesta
Registered User
We've been to two ECF's in three years, that's pretty good. They wanted to push themselves over the hump, it was a calculated risk. One that is paying off. A trip to the finals ensures that pick is #29 or 30. I can stomach that.
So say we drafted another Brady Skjei and, I dunno, Emerson Etem. That's who's available at the end of the first round. Quality prospects, for sure. Would two of those guys be the difference between success or failure in five years? Seems really, really unlikely.
Trading two late firsts makes assembling future teams more difficult, but not impossible by any means. We've been to the ECF two out of three years while doing a relatively poor job in the first round over the past decade.
slipknottin
Registered User
4 of them...
I think they absolutely could be a significant part of the team.
Throwing out a couple random names doesnt really mean anything to me.
- Sep 17, 2007
- 24,928
- 22,849
It isn't complicated. We sacrificed future assets for a short term benefit. If it doesn't pay off in the short term, then those assets were wasted. Fortunately for us, it is paying off right now.
Clown Fiesta
Registered User
When you make calculated selections later in the draft like Duclair you might make up for it. Assuming of course that you might not get any full time NHLers in the first three rounds even with all your picks.
broadwayblue
Registered User
slipknottin
Registered User
Certainly hope so, there is no doubt though, that it is easier to find talent in the earlier rounds.
I'm not throwing out a couple random names. I want you to go look at what's available in the last three or four picks of the first round. I think you're overstating the worth of a pick in that range.
And it's three years, not four. Right?
