I'd be surprised if they have a jersey for sale that doesn't have #88 on it.Whether this move is right or wrong (ultimately time will tell), I'm buying Kane swag at the game Thursday if they have it.
Gotta take some risksSo if we lose in the ECF again, we essentially traded both our first round picks for two rentals just to come up short again. Not happy with this.
That isn't strictly true. Driver, LaFontaine, Keane, Skrudland, Fleury, Kamensky, Lefebvre, Messier v2, Kasparaitis, de Vries, Holik, etc. were all UFAs.For those comparing this to "Rangers moves of the past", the difference is we used to mortgage our entire future for acquiring these older players. Now we do it incredibly frugally and don't hit our long-term substantially at all.
It's apples and oranges.
Rangers are going to win the Cup and avoid drafting another Bobby Sanguinetti in 2024/25
Next year's draft is "meh" from all reports. A low first round draft pick in a "meh" draft is absolutely worth a run.So if we lose in the ECF again, we essentially traded both our first round picks for two rentals just to come up short again. Not happy with this.
Fair. I guess you can claim the "mortgaging the future" portion on the opportunity cost of investing in those players versus building an organization from the ground up. Good points either way though.That isn't strictly true. Driver, LaFontaine, Keane, Skrudland, Fleury, Kamensky, Lefebvre, Messier v2, Kasparaitis, de Vries, Holik, etc. were all UFAs.
Lindros was a trade, but that was one of the most justifiable ones of the era.
Kovalev was a trade, but we really gave up very little (i.e., just Mikael Samuelsson, who admittedly was an excellent player)
Bure was a trade, but we gave up nothing.
Jagr was a trade straight up for Carter (who we got for an injured and declining Dvorak).
I don't think we were mortgaging our future so much as constantly chasing the shiny new (old?) toy. So people who are skeptical of this move...I get it. I am too. If you asked me two weeks ago, I was saying I didn't want Patrick Kane for free.
Arizona is the team retaining the other 25% so the Canucks deal was likely just a regular deal.The real question is was Vancouver the third team and are we square with them or is there another deal that needs to be announced? If I missed that please explain.
The pick slides if the condition is met. We will have a 1st this year.So if we lose in the ECF again, we essentially traded both our first round picks for two rentals just to come up short again. Not happy with this.
The real question is was Vancouver the third team and are we square with them or is there another deal that needs to be announced? If I missed that please explain.
Emily Kaplan said this:So if we lose in the ECF again, we essentially traded both our first round picks for two rentals just to come up short again. Not happy with this.
Emily Kaplan said this:
So if we lose in the ECF we're not giving up our other 2023 first, but rather one in 2024 or 2025 apparently.
Can’t screw em up if we don’t have em’ Danno!![]()
hahah what a steal, FYI the people complaining that if we reach the ECF, we give up a first in potentially 2025.....give me a f***ing break