couldn't agree more with the bolded
but i absolutely think he should be depended on to make this team at least look remotely competent nearly halfway through the season.
-
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
couldn't agree more with the bolded
but i absolutely think he should be depended on to make this team at least look remotely competent nearly halfway through the season.
We peaked under Torts. I liked him but the ECF appearance was the best possible result imo.
I'm with you, as much as I've been harping in the poor job AVs been doing, and I loved what torts did here, his time was over.
Edge
Kris King's Ghost
When Neil Smith was assembling the 1994 Rangers team he was criticized for going after ex-Oilers.
His response? "What, should I go after San Jose Sharks?"
As Sather was trying to assemble a championship team, who did he focus on? The Columbus Blue Jackets.
'Nuff said.
His response? "What, should I go after San Jose Sharks?"
As Sather was trying to assemble a championship team, who did he focus on? The Columbus Blue Jackets.
'Nuff said.
Please tell me how fielding 6 4th line players is the last reason we are losing?
Shadowtron
Registered User
All we need is Fletch and the Operation HF Reclamation is complete! Good seeing you again Edge!
Brief Candle
Hank's Forehead Sweat
Lets take a walk down memory lane!
Seriously though, this team is ****ed. It looks like there has to be some kind of locker room division here. They don't play for each other.
Lets take a walk down memory lane!
Seriously though, this team is ****ed. It looks like there has to be some kind of locker room division here. They don't play for each other.
We need a new one
mrhockey193195
Registered User
The more and more I think about this one point, the further I drift away from sanity. It makes me violent inside.
We took the most successful Rangers team in 15 years - a team that was young, homegrown, and growing together - and swapped a quarter of the roster with Columbus...
Are. You. ****ing. Kidding. Me.
mrhockey193195
Registered User
At this point, that's pretty much my reaction. I'm done being pissed about it...it's just funny.
problems with this team?
there are only 2 players on this team who have real talent, nash & richards
there are only 2 players on this team who have real talent, nash & richards
Ryan McDonut
Registered User
How do you figure that was the best result? Did we keep that team together and add anything to it to give it another shot? Or did we rip it apart?
SKjEi o2
Registered User
- Nov 13, 2013
- 187
- 0
Let it go already. Prust and Fedotenko weren't being resigned. I almost guarantee they wouldn't have performed as well the next year. That team was pretty lucky to have made it to the ECF. Plus Dubinsky had a falling out with Torts so he probably would have been traded anyways.
We got Rick ****ing Nash for 2 third liners, a prospect and a pick. Don't tell me you thought that was a bad trade at the time.
SKjEi o2
Registered User
- Nov 13, 2013
- 187
- 0
It was impossible to keep the team together, unless you wanted to resign a 4th liner for 2 and a half million dollars.
He could have been replaced for a cheaper player. People act like the Nash trade was the only way to increase scoring
And how do you know they wouldnt have performed as well? You seem to know alot. How was the team lucky? Their best season in years and they were lucky? Lol
mrhockey193195
Registered User
Are you referring to the team? Or Prust and Fedotenko? If the team, that's up for debate. If Prust and Fed, specifically for Prust, that's definitely not true considering how well he played for Montreal so far. Whether he was worth re-signing at 2.5 mill is the bigger question, not whether or not he would have performed for us.
I'm guessing you're referring to the team not being able to repeat its performance. You may be right. But I don't understand why we didn't at least let that group try again...let them fail once before tearing it all down.
aufheben
#Norris4Fox
1) Good teams make their own luck.
2) I guarantee that your guarantee is meaningless. Anyway, it's not solely about individual performances, it's the fact that the team as a unit had too much turnover.
3) I have been on the fence about the Nash trade since the day it happened.
4) Sather ended up using the money that could have kept Prust on the likes of Pyatt/Asham/Pouliot.
5) Feds got what, a 300k raise with the Flyers?
6) It's hard to "let it go" when the current problems with the Rangers are directly related to that team.
Idlerlee
Registered User
- Apr 19, 2013
- 4,227
- 807
So if you're not amongst the 100 best players in the world, you do not have talent ? Man hockey is a harsh sport
I have a question for rangers fans!
Wouldn't it be more beneficial to have Stepan play as a winger?
Your team seems to have a plethora of centers that are top 9 quality.
Stepan isn't too great at the draw which is probably one of the few weaknesses he has in his game. Wouldn't a Brad Richards be better suited as a Center. He's a great set up guy and he's decent as faceoffs. I've also heard that Stepan has played wing before so wouldn't it work? Or is he better suited as a center?
Wouldn't it be more beneficial to have Stepan play as a winger?
Your team seems to have a plethora of centers that are top 9 quality.
Stepan isn't too great at the draw which is probably one of the few weaknesses he has in his game. Wouldn't a Brad Richards be better suited as a Center. He's a great set up guy and he's decent as faceoffs. I've also heard that Stepan has played wing before so wouldn't it work? Or is he better suited as a center?
Exactly the team was poorly built at best and geared towards MAYBE two years. We clearly only got the one year and when you look at the PO's you realize just how much of an illusion it was.
Dubs and Artie were NOT contributing too much that magical year. Especially Dubs. Guy was practically invisble in most games and people were constantly criticizing him.
Dubs is the classic case of needing a change of scenery. Gabs and Richards then fell off the earth. End of story. there is the reason why last years team was such hot garbage. Nash also no showed in the PO's and Staal lost an eye.
That said...for Sather to make the Nash trade, make the gabs trade, THEN get rid of Torts....add to that not signing Prust only to bring in guys like Powe, Pyatt and Poo and it shows a level of such baffling incompetence that it frustrates sanity.
Dubs and Gabs were underperforming to an extraordinary degree. Both needed a change of scenery. We traded them and then we implemented that change of scenery ourselves by bringing in AV. Baffling
Please tell me how the bottom 6 forwards trump the following:
1. Top 6 forwards that aren't scoring consistently
2. A defense that often looks lost trying to play a new style
3. A goaltender who is playing far below is standards
These things seem a bit more important, no?
