Wasn't there an incident with Mollie doing post-game during '22-'23 (?) where she said "Don't touch me" out loud in the locker room, or something to that effect, and it was picked up by cameras? Did we ever find out if that was directed to another member of the media, a player, or Rangers staffer?
Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XX (WTF are we going to do this Off-Season edition)
- Thread starter Leonardo87
- Start date
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
I was stating events not creating a timeline.
Where is it definitively stated that “Drury tried to trade him without the heads up”? To where? And, if this were the case, why wasn’t he traded if his list was already submitted? And, again (see: Rantennen) there is no obligation here to the player - particularly Trouba who KNEW he was going to be on the move.
It’s murky and we’ll never know all of the facts about Trouba or Goodrow or the Rangers. Each of these parties have self serving interests and no obligation to be truthful whatsoever.
I’m certain that Trouba did what was best for him and his family and that’s certainly his right. As it is for the NYR as well.
- Apr 16, 2012
- 3,834
- 6,741
The "spirit" of the NTC is that you can't be traded to a team on the list you give. Players know the difference between a NMC and NTC. Goodrow could've gotten an NMC by taking less money or less term. He didn't. The team wanted him moved. They put him on waivers. He moved. It violated ZERO. Some people want these guys to have their cake and eat it too, I guess. Goodrow played bad enough and had an AAV big enough that his subtraction was an addition to the team and that no team he could be traded to wanted him at any price...
Now what TBL did to Mac was a violation of the "spirit" of the No Trade Clause. They used the leverage of waivers to get him to agree to a trade. NYR just waived Goodrow for no considerations.
- Aug 5, 2010
- 12,447
- 9,701
Didn't the Rangers at some point at the end of Feb or even into early March have the third best record in the NHL from the start of 2025? Whatever transpired before the end of 2024 had little to do with Lavi and more with just the players or players and Drury... Or are you suggesting making coaching move in March?
- Apr 16, 2012
- 3,834
- 6,741
Drury appointed the Captain? What's the source on that?
GoAwayPanarin
learn w/ da bern
Goodrow and Trouba have every right to be pissed off about the way things were handled. If they want to pop off and talk their shit, they can.
Everyone else can shut the f*** up though. The fact that this is still a topic of conversation in April says everything that you need to know about some of the core members of this group.
Everyone else can shut the f*** up though. The fact that this is still a topic of conversation in April says everything that you need to know about some of the core members of this group.
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
Where is it definitively stated? In all the reporting about the trade that fell apart around the draft. To where? Detroit. Why wasn't he traded if his list was already submitted? It wasn't already submitted! There wasn't a no-trade list at that point because he was still covered by the NMC. The list was submitted later. Up until that point, Trouba did NOT know he was going to be on the move.
It's only murky if you ignore the details that have been reported on by multiple sources.
Last edited:
Machinehead
The Olli react should add points!
Alright folks, that's enough about Mollie.
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
The "reporting about the trade" was pretty much all speculation, not hard "facts" at all. Show me where (I've looked) there's anything definitive about that deal. There's a lot of smoke but not a lot else.
And, in any event, if Trouba "did NOT know he was going to be on the move" (which is complete speculation) - what does it matter if HE HAD TO APPROVE THE MOVE? If there's a deal in place and Drury approaches him - "Hey, I've got the framework in place for a trade to Detroit. Is that cool with you?". Trouba "No".
What more does Drury owe him than that? Answer: Nothing. It's more than Rantannen got.
And, listen, I'm not even blaming Trouba for doing what he did. He has every right to do what's best for himself and his family. Strategic NTC locations, refusing to go to Detroit (if he even did), and whatever else.
It's this casting him as victim that really bothers me. He did everything he could do to stop the Rangers from moving him and eventually the Rangers had enough and Drury is the big meanie? Bullshit.
Same for Goodrow. He had one place that wanted him and that was Drury's only option. Was his method crappy for the player? Yes. However, given what was going on with Trouba throughout this I don't really blame Drury for being cold blooded and doing what's best for the Rangers.
Both of these trades were ultimately in the best interests of the NYR and that's his job.
The fact that the room collapsed under all of this shows that certain players need to have their leadership badges removed and go back to being players. Adam Fox was the only one of this core that really acknowledged that they simply weren't good enough the entire year.
- Apr 16, 2012
- 3,834
- 6,741
Homelander
Registered User
IMO it's probably fair that Drury didn't exactly work with Goodrow and Trouba on the trades in the way those players would have liked.
Whether it's reasonable to expect him to is maybe another question. This somewhat feels like the Sather way, or the old school way, but someone like Sather had swagger to shrug it off and no one cared that much. Drury doesn't have that.
Honestly unless we're part of the NHL in some capacity I'm not sure what we can say is "normal" and what is "Drury being a shithead". It's entirely possible that he's operating pretty normal for most NHL GMs and this group is particularly sensitive. Believe him or not, Brooks has basically said he feels they're the most overly sensitive and emotional group he's ever seen. That doesn't seem like it'd mix well in pro sports where business can be cutthroat.
If Drury had a proven track record we probably wouldn't even give a shit. Most of this is because we dislike him and it's another something easy to pin on him for blame.
Whether it's reasonable to expect him to is maybe another question. This somewhat feels like the Sather way, or the old school way, but someone like Sather had swagger to shrug it off and no one cared that much. Drury doesn't have that.
Honestly unless we're part of the NHL in some capacity I'm not sure what we can say is "normal" and what is "Drury being a shithead". It's entirely possible that he's operating pretty normal for most NHL GMs and this group is particularly sensitive. Believe him or not, Brooks has basically said he feels they're the most overly sensitive and emotional group he's ever seen. That doesn't seem like it'd mix well in pro sports where business can be cutthroat.
If Drury had a proven track record we probably wouldn't even give a shit. Most of this is because we dislike him and it's another something easy to pin on him for blame.
I remember it but yeah I cannot recall if it was a staffer or player. I want to say it was a player
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
Asking a guy with an NMC if he'll approve a trade is the LAST step of the process. The FIRST step is giving the guy with the NMC the courtesy of telling him he's on the block. By the letter of the rules, Drury doesn't owe him that, but it's not about the letter of the rules of the contract. Drury owes a long-term player who wears the C for the team more than just the letter of the rules. He owes ALL of his players courtesy.
Stop twisting my words as if I'm casting Trouba as the victim. Like I said, he is not absolved of responsibility for how it all played out in the end.
Let's play alternate reality for a second. In early June, Drury calls up Trouba and has the difficult conversation. He tells him that he's decided to make a change and he'll be trying to trade him. He asks if Trouba has any preferred destinations. He tells Trouba that if he has to wait for Trouba to submit his no-trade list on 7/1, then he will. And he tells Trouba that if he can't find a deal to one of his preferred destinations, and Trouba won't accept a deal to one of his non-preferred destination, he'll have to waive him. Does Trouba makes his list specifically to prevent the team from trading him? Probably not, because he knows if he does that he could easily end up somewhere he doesn't want to.
More importantly though, it doesn't play out in the media and his teammates don't feel like "our GM doesn't give a damn about us as people. He just sees this as a video game." The ENTIRE thing plays out very differently.
Last edited:
At the end of the day, it doesn't really matter what went down with Trouba or Goodrow. What matters is the results on the ice and his understanding of the dynamics in the room. And it wasn't pretty. Maybe expectations were too high, maybe the team wasn't that good, maybe injuries got the better of some guys. But Drury is the captain of the ship, he failed. And if it were just the Trouba and Goodrow situations, maybe you could shrug it off and say the players were being babies. But there were also the trades, the extensions, the handling of injuries. Everything the guy touched this year turned to shit. And I keep coming back to the question, how the hell is a guy who doesn't seem to be good at anything, with no clear vision allowed to hire his 3rd coach?
Last edited:
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
My only thing about it is that we can find good evidence of other GMs not working that way. I mean, I know Sather traded Leetch on his birthday and I know Shattenkirk was shocked when Gorton bought him out... but check out this article.
Inside Ryan McDonagh’s trade to the Predators, its lingering impact and a Lightning reunion
The Predators defenseman opens up about the surprising end of his time with the Lightning: "I didn't really get to say goodbye."
www.nytimes.com
If you don't have access, this is the relevant passage to this conversation.
Glen Sathers Cigar
Sather 4 Ever
Wtf are we talking about here? Goodrow was eligible to be waived and he was waived. Why does it have to go any further than that? Should Drury have baked him a cake and thrown a going away party for him first?
Jesus Christ, waivers is a part of roster management in the NHL. Goodrow had a partial NTC, which protects him from being traded to a certain list of teams, that's the only protection he had in his contract and thus was eligible to be placed on waivers. Why is there anything else read into it other than that? Sneaky? It's a part how player movement and roster management in today's NHL works.
Hopefully this puts the wah wah McDonagh was treated the same way bla bla to rest.My only thing about it is that we can find good evidence of other GMs not working that way. I mean, I know Sather traded Leetch on his birthday and I know Shattenkirk was shocked when Gorton bought him out... but check out this article.
Inside Ryan McDonagh’s trade to the Predators, its lingering impact and a Lightning reunion
The Predators defenseman opens up about the surprising end of his time with the Lightning: "I didn't really get to say goodbye."
If you don't have access, this is the relevant passage to this conversation.
bleedblue94
Registered User
- Jun 8, 2004
- 8,846
- 12,144
People hammering culture are not the ones saying quick fix. Everyone knows it's a culture problem at this point, the players have shared as much without actually saying it. The players are the bounce back group bc they don't want to own the mess and the depth of it. There is no quick fix here unless an asshole like torts comes in with free ability to manage the group but they turn the x's and o's over to other coaches such as peca or muse if they keep them. That actually how torts has coach in phili and Columbus, he switched his role to accountability and player management and let assistants do the "coaching." I know the Cam York jokes will start coming but from the standpoint of culture/accountability/room torts has been successful building foundations, but his teams haven't been filled with good ish players that can make a push. If he were rehired it would probably scare certain players right into line or the slugs would be willing to waive their nmc/ntc to get away from him. There are a lot of reasons to be skeptical of torts coming back, but it would be a good idea if the purpose is well defined. The purpose at this point cannot be simply make playoff, there are foundational issues here that need to be addressed from the ground up.
SA16
Registered User
- Aug 25, 2006
- 13,423
- 14,791
The problem is there is a conflict of interest between the player and agent.
The player can potentially get an NMC if he agrees to take less money.
Why would the agent want to do that though when his fee is a percentage of the players salary? Unless the player specifically says he will only take a deal with a full NMC the agent isn't going to look to do something like that.
I'd also tend to doubt that prior to Goodrow/McDonagh that players understood they could be waived and claimed by a team on their NTC. I'd imagine in the next CBA they adjust it so a NTC is really more of a "no acquisition under any circumstances" clause.
bleedblue94
Registered User
- Jun 8, 2004
- 8,846
- 12,144
Reporters came out after the trade a publicly shared the rangers had tried to ship chytil for awhile but other teams wouldn't touch it. Friedman for one openly reported that on his podcast after the trade. I think Brooks alluded to it as well.
Just bc they named kreider and trouba in a single email doesn't mean those are the only players the team shopped or looked to move. That email was all on purpose and a part of the fallout from the summer. People still don't always get the connections and the fact that email was absolutely expected to go public when it was sent.
will1066
Negative body language
- Oct 12, 2008
- 44,227
- 79,374
What we have got here is an emo group coupled with a GM who lacks empathy and a non-believer of social mores. That's not a good combination.
Also, none of this stuff would have happened if those guys performed to their levels of capability. Winning solves everything, as the saying goes.
- Apr 16, 2012
- 3,834
- 6,741
Sure. But the agent works for the player. And everyone knows the difference between a NTC and a NMC. If a player isn't reviewing the major terms of the contract he is signing that is an issue... but not the team's issue. This is ultimately on the player, and the dynamic between the agent and the player is outside of the team's purview.
Maybe the league, or better yet the NHLPA, should have a program set up to educate the players on what contract terms mean and how to deal with an agent if its really something that is undermining the players.
Fitzy
Very Stable Genius
- Jan 29, 2009
- 35,059
- 24,917
That's one situation where unless they have a more productive use for the cap space in mind, it's probably better just to keep him for now.
Unless you think he's dragging down the whole locker room.
Otherwise just keep scaling back his role as a wing.
Latest posts
-
The 2025 Draft Thread: Picks 9, 39, 71, 103, 117, 135, 167, 195, 199, 223 (16 Viewers)- Latest: Chainshot
-
-
Bennett hit on Stolarz (no supplemental discipline) MOD WARNING IN POST #621 (266 Viewers)- Latest: ThrowDemTongs
-
-
