Post-Game Talk: New York Rangers at Ottawa Senators - February 17

[GoAwayPanarin]

Since the lockout, the Wings, Ducks, and Bruins won without bottoming out. The Bruins did have Seguin but he was a rookie. The Rangers and Sharks could have easily won with a couple of bounces. Neither team bottomed out.

2 of those teams won the first 2 seasons after the lockout.

How long did it take the Rangers to build up their cache of home grown talent before being in a position to ice a cup contending roster that way? 8 years?

You can make this happen MUCH faster by doing this the way that I'm saying.

Also Marelau was a 2nd overall pick and they got a sweetheart deal for Thornton from Boston (Who was a 1OA in the same draft.) The latter of those things isn't something you can really rely on.

Also, Thornton got traded to San Jose in 2006, they didn't get to the finals until 2016. I don't know if they the example you want to be using. Sure they've been competitive for a while, they're sort of the west coast version of this era of Rangers, except their elite talent was a C instead of a G.

 

[mike14]

Indeed I am, but beyond that, I am a fan above all else and have been since the age of five. I will NEVER root for a loss!

Which is great. But there's a difference between 'rooting' (damn I hate that term!) for a loss and understanding why a team is going to sell expiring assets and look to restock a cupboard that had become pretty empty

 

[KOVALEV022473]

A bunch. I'm not arguing that its a bullet proof plan. But it has a MUCH higher rate of success than to keep going for it when you're where the Rangers are right now (where the success rate is 0%)

Lets not try to compare the Rangers to the Panthers or Coyotes though. Being a big market team, they're going to always be a hot spot for UFA's. As long as they don't **** up their draft picks, it won't take too long for them to be competitive again.

Success of what??! Not winning a cup, which is essentially your penultimate argument!

 

[bl02]

Edmonton tanked for like 19 straight decades and was in the playoffs 2x.

And after this year there is no guarantee that they will be going any further than they did last year. Wouldn't be shocked if they got Dahlin as well

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Success of what??! Not winning a cup, which is essentially your penultimate argument!

Success is running a team out there that has a legitimate shot to win, sort of like the teams we had a few years ago.

This group is not good enough.

 

[bl02]

Which is great. But there's a difference between 'rooting' (damn I hate that term!) for a loss and understanding why a team is going to sell expiring assets and look to restock a cupboard that had become pretty empty

For the longterm health of the team this is probably best. I think you're right. I will never root for a loss but I definitely understand restocking the cupboard is a necessity right now for sure. Well said.
Thats also why I root for the teams behind us to win every day.

 

[KOVALEV022473]

Which is great. But there's a difference between 'rooting' (damn I hate that term!) for a loss and understanding why a team is going to sell expiring assets and look to restock a cupboard that had become pretty empty

As stated previously, it doesn’t work the vast majority of the time.

 

[FireGerardGallant]

As stated previously, it doesn’t work the vast majority of the time.

Neither does staying mediocre ask the Wild about that

 

[bl02]

Success is running a team out there that has a legitimate shot to win, sort of like the teams we had a few years ago.

This group is not good enough.

Definitely not good enough. Lets just hope the culture of winning is there when the turnaround will begin to take shape. Whether thats next year (unlikely) or 2,3,4 years from now.
Scouts, player development, coaching, FO all that behind the scenes stuff that we don't see is gonna be critical

 

[pylon17]

Indeed I am (a shareholder)

Your .02 on rebuilding/retooling can no longer be taken seriously sorry.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Definitely not good enough. Lets just hope the culture of winning is there when the turnaround will begin to take shape. Whether thats next year (unlikely) or 2,3,4 years from now.
Scouts, player development, coaching, FO all that behind the scenes stuff that we don't see is gonna be critical

Absolutely.

I'm excited to see this get started but I'm not deluded enough to think that this plan is a 100% lock to succeed. With that said the "we shouldn't do this because we might f*** up" mentality is something I can't get on board with, because the alternative is "If we don't do this, we WILL f*** this up" or "we will f*** this up for even longer."

 

[KOVALEV022473]

Neither does staying mediocre ask the Wild about that

lol you can name me exactly three teams that have won the cup in the last nine years. No other teams had 1st, 2nd, 3rd overall etc... ?

 

[bl02]

Lot of this talk will become clearer after TDL. If guys like Mcdonagh and Zucc are still here the "rebuilding" is gonna take longer for sure. also we won't be as bad next year which will probably cause us to not get a high pick

 

[Glennsoe]

Henke's been replaced/pulled 4 times in the last 9 games..

Where there's smoke..there's fire?

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Lot of this talk will become clearer after TDL. If guys like Mcdonagh and Zucc are still here the "rebuilding" is gonna take longer for sure. also we won't be as bad next year which will probably cause us to not get a high pick

Well it'll become clearer after the summer, when those guys (and others) can still be moved and other players will be added.

 

[mike14]

As stated previously, it doesn’t work the vast majority of the time.

What doesn't, refreshing your talent pool? Of course it works, every club does it. There's no 1 way of doing it, but it has to be done, whether that be by selling everything not nailed down, trading in players to an established core or some other means (like buying up every over the hill and overpaid UFA). If you don't do one of those things you'll stagnate (which could be argued the Rangers have basically done for the last 3 seasons including this one).

The reason you can say "it doesn't work" is because only 1 team can win the cup in any given year, so the other 29 (now 30) teams' plan 'didn't work' regardless of what option they went with. But almost every team that has years of sustained 'success' (in this case being high finishes and long playoff runs) had some period where they bottomed out to refresh their roster. The trick (and the aim) is to do it without gutting everything, and also making sure you have the right people with the right skills to identify and grow that talent.

For the Rangers (assuming that they have the right people in the right places) they are lucky because unlike your Arizona's, Edmoton's, Buffalo's, etc they have an ownership group who allow them to spend to the cap (and even bury players in the minors) and they are, and will likely continue to be an attractive place for UFAs to sign.

This means that instead of having to hit every early pick out of the draft and then have no-one around to play with them, they can restock the system with a few early pick drafts (we've already had one, and look like we're about to have another), and bring in the supporting talent. That doesn't mean they are a surefire shot at the cup, but I'd argue from a % point of view it would be a much higher number than continuing to 'kick the can' with the roster has regressed over the past few seasons

 

[FireGerardGallant]

Injuries aside, this team could’ve and should’ve had a much better season. That being said, a savvy GM makes the trades

lol you can name me exactly three reams that have won the cup in the last nine years. No other teams had 1st, 2nd, 3rd overall etc... ?

Well oilers have hogged up the picks and they've been s*** at developing them and putting good teams around them
Auston Matthews is leading a Leafs team that seem like serious contenders
Jets picked laine second they're serious contenders

The Problem with Edmonton, Florida, etc is they got these top players and didn't build a good team around them. Drafting in the first round is only half of it, but picking higher helps than picking lower if you can't get that through your brain idk what to tell you

 

[ZiGOODejad]

guys lets face it we haven't had any first round picks for a while we had no new talent coming in other then Skjei and Butchie maybe Vesey?(right...) we're way over due to suck for a while i just hate the fact we have to gut the team and start over now

 

[Siddi]

Your .02 on rebuilding/retooling can no longer be taken seriously sorry.

How come?

 

[SnowblindNYR]

2 of those teams won the first 2 seasons after the lockout.

How long did it take the Rangers to build up their cache of home grown talent before being in a position to ice a cup contending roster that way? 8 years?

You can make this happen MUCH faster by doing this the way that I'm saying.

Also Marelau was a 2nd overall pick and they got a sweetheart deal for Thornton from Boston (Who was a 1OA in the same draft.) The latter of those things isn't something you can really rely on.

Also, Thornton got traded to San Jose in 2006, they didn't get to the finals until 2016. I don't know if they the example you want to be using. Sure they've been competitive for a while, they're sort of the west coast version of this era of Rangers, except their elite talent was a C instead of a G.

First of all, I'm leaning towards tank right now, so don't take any of this the wrong way. Second, what difference does it make that it was right after the lockout? They still had the same Salary Cap everyone had to contend with. Third, the fact that San Jose didn't make it to the cup final until 2016 is somewhat coincidental since they have been good enough for years. Finally, you're moving the goalposts. So first it was you couldn't win by not bottoming out, now you can't win quickly enough by not bottoming out. Would I rather hope that I have a 10% chance of being a contender in 3 years but a 90% chance of being a bottom feeder? Or a 10% chance of being a contender in 8 years but a 90% chance of being competitive for years to come? I know this doesn't capture all scenarios but I simplified it to prove a point.

The tank or death crowd are like speculators telling value investors you're more likely to make big bucks fast as a speculator, while not focusing on the downside, the fact that you're more likely to lose big busts fast being a speculator.

 

[KOVALEV022473]

What doesn't, refreshing your talent pool? Of course it works, every club does it. There's no 1 way of doing it, but it has to be done, whether that be by selling everything not nailed down, trading in players to an established core or some other means (like buying up every over the hill and overpaid UFA). If you don't do one of those things you'll stagnate (which could be argued the Rangers have basically done for the last 3 seasons including this one).

The reason you can say "it doesn't work" is because only 1 team can win the cup in any given year, so the other 29 (now 30) teams' plan 'didn't work' regardless of what option they went with. But almost every team that has years of sustained 'success' (in this case being high finishes and long playoff runs) had some period where they bottomed out to refresh their roster. The trick (and the aim) is to do it without gutting everything, and also making sure you have the right people with the right skills to identify and grow that talent.

For the Rangers (assuming that they have the right people in the right places) they are lucky because unlike your Arizona's, Edmoton's, Buffalo's, etc they have an ownership group who allow them to spend to the cap (and even bury players in the minors) and they are, and will likely continue to be an attractive place for UFAs to sign.

This means that instead of having to hit every early pick out of the draft and then have no-one around to play with them, they can restock the system with a few early pick drafts (we've already had one, and look like we're about to have another), and bring in the supporting talent. That doesn't mean they are a surefire shot at the cup, but I'd argue from a % point of view it would be a much higher number than continuing to 'kick the can' with the roster has regressed over the past few seasons

Of course I agree with your first point, but it shouldn’t put a fan in a position of having to root against their team. A good GM does their job and makes the necessary moves to keep the organization competitive. And for you guys running this organization down for “Kicks at the proverbial Can” being as competitive as NYR have been is what has allowed them to attract free agents signings out of NCAA and other leagues, which would otherwise equate to first rounders.

 

[KOVALEV022473]

First of all, I'm leaning towards tank right now, so don't take any of this the wrong way. Second, what difference does it make that it was right after the lockout? They still had the same Salary Cap everyone had to contend with. Third, the fact that San Jose didn't make it to the cup final until 2016 is somewhat coincidental since they have been good enough for years. Finally, you're moving the goalposts. So first it was you couldn't win by not bottoming out, now you can't win quickly enough by not bottoming out. Would I rather hope that I have a 10% chance of being a contender in 3 years but a 90% chance of being a bottom feeder? Or a 10% chance of being a contender in 8 years but a 90% chance of being competitive for years to come? I know this doesn't capture all scenarios but I simplified it to prove a point.

The tank or death crowd are like speculators telling value investors you're more likely to make big bucks fast as a speculator, while not focusing on the downside, the fact that you're more likely to lose big busts fast being a speculator.

Excellent post, SnowblindNYR!

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

First of all, I'm leaning towards tank right now, so don't take any of this the wrong way. Second, what difference does it make that it was right after the lockout? They still had the same Salary Cap everyone had to contend with. Third, the fact that San Jose didn't make it to the cup final until 2016 is somewhat coincidental since they have been good enough for years. Finally, you're moving the goalposts. So first it was you couldn't win by not bottoming out, now you can't win quickly enough by not bottoming out. Would I rather hope that I have a 10% chance of being a contender in 3 years but a 90% chance of being a bottom feeder? Or a 10% chance of being a contender in 8 years but a 90% chance of being competitive for years to come? I know this doesn't capture all scenarios but I simplified it to prove a point.

The tank or death crowd are like speculators telling value investors you're more likely to make big bucks fast as a speculator, while not focusing on the downside, the fact that you're more likely to lose big busts fast being a speculator.

It's not moving goal posts.

Its incredibly difficult to build a winner with out doing it. San Jose got a great player in Marelau with the 2OA pick and then basically had an in his prime Joe Thornton fall into their laps. If you're relying on that to present itself to the Rangers, you're banking on something that doesn't happen very often and oh, you better already have a border line hall of fame talent on your roster!

BTW, I'm just saying that going for it with THIS team, as it is constructed right now, is 100% destined for failure.

But find me a cup winner that didn't have a top 5 (usually multiple) pick as a major contributor. You won't be able to do it, especially in the Cap era.

 

[will1066]

Tired of this bickering.

We need a Richard Nash proverb:

"If we have lost three games in a row, then we have not won a game in three straight games."

 

[KOVALEV022473]

It's not moving goal posts.

Its incredibly difficult to build a winner with out doing it. San Jose got a great player in Marelau with the 2OA pick and then basically had an in his prime Joe Thornton fall into their laps. If you're relying on that to present itself to the Rangers, you're banking on something that doesn't happen very often and oh, you better already have a border line hall of fame talent on your roster!

BTW, I'm just saying that going for it with THIS team, as it is constructed right now, is 100% destined for failure.

But find me a cup winner that didn't have a top 5 (usually multiple) pick as a major contributor. You won't be able to do it, especially in the Cap era.

That’s because there have only been FIVE winners in that time.