Problems With This Team

[mrhockey193195]

I'm just sick of the hypocrisy. People would've assaulted Sather back then if he didn't trade for Nash. And now they're calling him an idiot for making the trade.

This, x1000. I know it's a very "holier than thou" attitude, but all the guys who posted in that Stepan thread earlier last year and were calling for him to be "traded while he still had value", all the guys who were clamoring for Torts to be fired because "he's holding back the offense, you'll see when we get a real coach"...I just can't take them seriously or listen to anything they say.

Not to say that I haven't been wrong before, but I feel like at the very least I acknowledge when I'm wrong and I shut up about what the team should do for a while.

 

[Paulie Walnutz]

This discussion starts and ends with the Teflon gm and his 13 year plan

 

[mrhockey193195]

LOL we went from "That's my evidence" to throwing in the towel and admitting you can't prove anything.
We're making progress now if we can get to admitting that we are assigning waaaaay too much blame to the Nash trade we'll have made a breakthrough. Simple is correct it does not take anything substantial into account. It's a very shallow attempt to lay the blame erroneously at the feet of one thing. If there was a top ten list of reasons why the team fell apart like this the Nash trade might be number 10. If percentages were assigned it might be 5% responsible

oops you werent the dramatic thats my evidence dude. There are statistics that losing Dubs did not hurt the team. In fact looking at on ice performance it seems Nash was a definitive step up. The problem is the front office and the team around him bc it has been assembled poorly at best

Sorry, I really don't understand what you're trying to say here.

I posted this:

Agree with this post 100%. My other problem is that we can blame Sather all we want, but everything that you mentioned in your post were things that our fanbase was clamoring for.

We lost in the 2012 ECF, everyone and their mother wanted to trade for Nash to get more offense. And everyone thought Dubinsky was replaceable because he had one bad offensive year. Then, we underperform for most of 2012-13 after replacing Prust, Dubinsky, Fedotenko, etc. with Pyatt, Halpern, Asham, and everyone wants Torts gone because he's holding back our offense. So we fire Torts, and now everyone is saying that the team is poorly constructed and Sather should have known that replacing the coach wouldn't do anything.

to which you responded with this:

I think the Nash trade is the biggest fallacy around here. It had nothing to do with 40 G 80 pt Gaborik disappearing. It had nothing to do with 90 pt PPQB Richards turning into a legendary failure. It had nothing to do with Sauer's career ending and nothing to do with an errant puck degrading Staal to mush. It didn't kill Cherepanov or cause Boog's OD, it didn't demand Korpikoski's trade, it didn't stall Grachev's development.It didn't sign Gomez, redden and Drury to awful ill-advised contracts. Sather and a mix of horrific, literally tragic luck

I actually feel sad now. 3 career's lost, 2 LIVES lost and a bunch of other talents just disappearing.

We both were expressing opinions, neither of which could be proved or disproved. Then you get all defensive telling me my opinions can't be proved, and I agree with you - they can't, and neither can yours. And yet you just posted with a bunch of stuff about how I am definitely wrong and putting too much emphasis on the Nash trade. Well, can you prove that I'm putting too much emphasis on it?

I haven't thrown in the white towel at all, I still think I'm right and you're wrong. You think the opposite. In reality, we'll never know who's actually right. Unless you want to respond with another post that's impossible to understand, let's leave it at that?

And for the record, my posts have basically been directly related to the hypocrisy of our fanbase...how they are complaining about Sather when he actually pretty much did everything they asked for.

 

[HFsNumber1Heel]

Gaborik trade was fine at first because Moore looked good, Brassard was turning into Dave Gagner after the Rangers got rid of him, and Dorsett was a useful grinder. It was a wise asset management move to get young inexpensive pieces to stay competitive.

The truth of the matter is Gabby's gone from CBJ after this year and he may never be the same so it's gonna be a wash for both sides.

 

[Hi ImHFNYR]

Sorry, I really don't understand what you're trying to say here.

I posted this:



to which you responded with this:



We both were expressing opinions, neither of which could be proved or disproved. Then you get all defensive telling me my opinions can't be proved, and I agree with you - they can't, and neither can yours. And yet you just posted with a bunch of stuff about how I am definitely wrong and putting too much emphasis on the Nash trade. Well, can you prove that I'm putting too much emphasis on it?

I haven't thrown in the white towel at all, I still think I'm right and you're wrong. You think the opposite. In reality, we'll never know who's actually right. Unless you want to respond with another post that's impossible to understand, let's leave it at that?

And for the record, my posts have basically been directly related to the hypocrisy of our fanbase...how they are complaining about Sather when he actually pretty much did everything they asked for.

See post I made on first page dunno why you keep ignoring that. In other words yes I already DID show why you ARE putting too much emphasis. also in what you quoted it acknowledges I was responding to a different guy. Did you not read what you quoted?

 

[mrhockey193195]

+1

Columbus is a losing culture. The players we aquired don't know how to win. That is why this team is so lackluster IMO. We replaced heart and soul with losers.

Now I don't think we would've won with the heart and soul guys but we should've taken a different path looking back.

This is where I stand as well. Obviously, you can't make things black and white and look at it in a vacuum, but I always chuckle (...or cry) when I think about how we took the successful 2011-12 team and replaced a fifth of the roster with a fifth of the roster of one of the worst franchise's in the league, and somehow thought we would be better because of it.

 

[HFsNumber1Heel]

This is where I stand as well. Obviously, you can't make things black and white and look at it in a vacuum, but I always chuckle (...or cry) when I think about how we took the successful 2011-12 team and replaced a fifth of the roster with a fifth of the roster of one of the worst franchise's in the league, and somehow thought we would be better because of it.

To be fair the 2010-11 and 2011-12 teams couldn't be duplicated because of the salary cap. If Prust got the money he got from Montreal and he is/was as injured as he is now, he'd be a whipping boy around here.

Mitchell would still be picked on too.

 

[mrhockey193195]

See post I made on first page dunno why you keep ignoring that. In other words yes I already DID show why you ARE putting too much emphasis. also in what you quoted it acknowledges I was responding to a different guy. Did you not read what you quoted?

Nothing you wrote has proven to me that trading Dubinsky and Anisimov for Nash was a major blow to the heart and soul of this team, and was a big reason we struggled last year (along with losing Prust, Richards and Gaborik playing terribly, Torts losing the team) and have struggled this year (even though Richards is actually playing well...but it seems like the team has no energy or effort or desire to put in 100% on every shift, like they used to).

 

[AlternateSideParking]

Sorry but this season's mediocrity is 100 pct the byproduct of the Team's MVP playing mediocre.

And dont give me that goal support BS. When has Lundqvist ever had an offense? Or a productive PP? This team has never scored for him and always relied on him to bail them out, or at least keep them in games.

A Vezina-esque Lundqvist and this team is 20-10. Period. People can blame the goal support all they want, but it's not hard to understand that when you give up the first goal of a game, it changes the strategy of a game.

The problem with Lundqvist is that he hasnt been consistently holding onto leads or keeping games tied. He's let in awful, awful goals this season.

I still think he turns it around, but blaming the coach or the GM when the goalie cant stop a beach ball is pretty off the mark, if you asked me.

9-12-1 and not even in the top-30 in GAA and SVPCT.

Yup. All Sather's fault.

 

[mrhockey193195]

To be fair the 2010-11 and 2011-12 teams couldn't be duplicated because of the salary cap. If Prust got the money he got from Montreal and he is/was as injured as he is now, he'd be a whipping boy around here.

Mitchell would still be picked on too.

Fair points. Mitchell was definitely someone where hindsight can be pretty misleading. I used to be frustrated out of my mind with him when he was a Ranger, and yet there were times last year when I remember thinking "man, I wish we still had Johnny Malkin on our 4th line"

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Sorry but this season's mediocrity is 100 pct the byproduct of the Team's MVP playing mediocre.

And dont give me that goal support BS. When has Lundqvist ever had an offense? Or a productive PP? This team has never scored for him and always relied on him to bail them out, or at least keep them in games.

A Vezina-esque Lundqvist and this team is 20-10. Period. People can blame the goal support all they want, but it's not hard to understand that when you give up the first goal of a game, it changes the strategy of a game.

The problem with Lundqvist is that he hasnt been consistently holding onto leads or keeping games tied. He's let in awful, awful goals this season.

I still think he turns it around, but blaming the coach or the GM when the goalie cant stop a beach ball is pretty off the mark, if you asked me.

9-12-1 and not even in the top-30 in GAA and SVPCT.

Yup. All Sather's fault.

13 years and the man needs a perennial Vezina finalist just to field a competitive team. Thats a joke.

 

[aufheben]

Sorry but this season's mediocrity is 100 pct the byproduct of the Team's MVP playing mediocre.

And dont give me that goal support BS. When has Lundqvist ever had an offense? Or a productive PP? This team has never scored for him and always relied on him to bail them out, or at least keep them in games.

A Vezina-esque Lundqvist and this team is 20-10. Period. People can blame the goal support all they want, but it's not hard to understand that when you give up the first goal of a game, it changes the strategy of a game.

The problem with Lundqvist is that he hasnt been consistently holding onto leads or keeping games tied. He's let in awful, awful goals this season.

I still think he turns it around, but blaming the coach or the GM when the goalie cant stop a beach ball is pretty off the mark, if you asked me.

9-12-1 and not even in the top-30 in GAA and SVPCT.

Yup. All Sather's fault.

So what you're really saying is: When Henrik isn't in God-mode, the team is exposed for what it really is, and then you imply it's not Sather's fault?

This team gets shut out 1 out of every 4 games. '11-12 was a blast, but the problems with this team start and end with Glen Sather, and the sick part is that that isn't changing. We actually had a damn good team, all the other teams/fans couldn't stand us, but they had to respect us. He changed the complexion of that team after reaching the ECF.

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

13 years and the man needs a perennial Vezina finalist just to field a competitive team. Thats a joke.

13 years and there's been one constant. But, nah, that couldn't be the problem.

 

[slipknottin]

So what you're really saying is: When Henrik isn't in God-mode, the team is exposed for what it really is, and then you imply it's not Sather's fault?

This team gets shut out 1 out of every 4 games.

Are the Pens a good team without Crosby and Malkin? Are the kings a good team without Quick standing on his head? Are the hawks a good team without Toews and Keith?

Best players have to be your best players. There is no team in the league that is a great team without its best player or players.

Rangers are no exception.

When your highest paid goalie in the league is being outplayed by rookie Cam Talbot your team is going to suck

 

[The Gloaming]

Kings have Doughty, Kopitar, Brown, Richards, and Carter.

Hawks have Kane, Hossa, Sharp, Hjalmarrson.

We have no one.

 

[aufheben]

Crosby and Malkin have missed plenty of time in their careers.

Being a mediocre team with a great goalie doesn't make you a good team, it makes you a mediocre team with a great goalie. (i.e. Every Rangers team that made the playoffs since 2005, with the exception of 11-12).

Hank has spoiled the **** out of us.

 

[Riverdale]

Are the Pens a good team without Crosby and Malkin? Are the kings a good team without Quick standing on his head? Are the hawks a good team without Toews and Keith?

Best players have to be your best players. There is no team in the league that is a great team without its best player or players.

Rangers are no exception.

When your highest paid goalie in the league is being outplayed by rookie Cam Talbot your team is going to suck

Yes. Those teams are still good if one of their star players goes down.

Great? Most likely not. Good? yes.

 

[slipknottin]

Crosby and Malkin have missed plenty of time in their careers.

Being a mediocre team with a great goalie doesn't make you a good team, it makes you a mediocre team with a great goalie. (i.e. Every Rangers team that made the playoffs since 2005, with the exception of 11-12).

Hank has spoiled the **** out of us.

And the pens haven't won a cup since both were there and healthy...

So like I said. Remove any teams best player/players and they won't be a great team.

I don't care at all about what hank has done in his past. He's playing like utter crap right now.

 

[broadwayblue]

Sorry but this season's mediocrity is 100 pct the byproduct of the Team's MVP playing mediocre.

And dont give me that goal support BS. When has Lundqvist ever had an offense? Or a productive PP? This team has never scored for him and always relied on him to bail them out, or at least keep them in games.

A Vezina-esque Lundqvist and this team is 20-10. Period. People can blame the goal support all they want, but it's not hard to understand that when you give up the first goal of a game, it changes the strategy of a game.

The problem with Lundqvist is that he hasnt been consistently holding onto leads or keeping games tied. He's let in awful, awful goals this season.

I still think he turns it around, but blaming the coach or the GM when the goalie cant stop a beach ball is pretty off the mark, if you asked me.

9-12-1 and not even in the top-30 in GAA and SVPCT.

Yup. All Sather's fault.

Don't give you any goal support BS? How did you expect us to win tonight when we didn't score any goals? Seriously, were you hoping Hank could careen one off the boards and past Grubauer? lol

 

[slipknottin]

Yes. Those teams are still good if one of their star players goes down.

Great? Most likely not. Good? yes.

Good? Maybe. But good teams don't win cups. Isn't that the goal?

Bashing Sather for the king playing like poop is idiotic.

 

[aufheben]

If your team can't win without the goalie standing on his head every night, it's not a good team. You can blame Hank for exposing what this team really is (or not, lol), but you can't blame him for what this team really is. That is the ****ing GM's job.

I'm not gonna split hairs on this, obviously Hank is part of the team, but the skaters are mediocre at best. You can't say "But Hank IS part of the team" and then immediately before/after blame everything on Hank. It doesn't make any gosh darn sense.

Blaming Hank is shortsighted.

 

[RangersHank*]

Sorry but this season's mediocrity is 100 pct the byproduct of the Team's MVP playing mediocre.

And dont give me that goal support BS. When has Lundqvist ever had an offense? Or a productive PP? This team has never scored for him and always relied on him to bail them out, or at least keep them in games.

A Vezina-esque Lundqvist and this team is 20-10. Period. People can blame the goal support all they want, but it's not hard to understand that when you give up the first goal of a game, it changes the strategy of a game.

The problem with Lundqvist is that he hasnt been consistently holding onto leads or keeping games tied. He's let in awful, awful goals this season.

I still think he turns it around, but blaming the coach or the GM when the goalie cant stop a beach ball is pretty off the mark, if you asked me.

9-12-1 and not even in the top-30 in GAA and SVPCT.

Yup. All Sather's fault.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

And the pens haven't won a cup since both were there and healthy...

So like I said. Remove any teams best player/players and they won't be a great team.

I don't care at all about what hank has done in his past. He's playing like utter crap right now.

How about a 7th round Swedish goaltender that he stumbled into in 2000 being his best player here in 2013?

 

[slipknottin]

Don't give you any goal support BS? How did you expect us to win tonight when we didn't score any goals? Seriously, were you hoping Hank could careen one off the boards and past Grubauer? lol

It doesn't even matter.

How many games would any team win with a goalie 26th in SV%, and 28th in GAA

 

[slipknottin]

How about a 7th round Swedish goaltender that he stumbled into in 2000 being his best player here in 2013?

He's not the best player on the team. He's not even as good as Talbot.