Toggle sidebar

Sam Rosen was right (Historical impact of Rangers' roster moves)

  • 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
Status
Not open for further replies.

True Blue

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
30,092
8,362
And this one will last a lifetime. It sure will. Because it is moves like yesterday's that remind me over and over again about why it is that the Rangers are among the least successful franchises in NHL history. Heck, maybe all of sports.

We are now over a third of the way to another 54 years without a Cup. We have had what, one Cup victory, several Cup finals appearances and a handful of conference finals in effectively 75 years? Since '94, who is worse than the Rangers? The Oilers? Islanders? Panthers? What sterling, pristine company that is.

Haven't we seen the script for this before? We traded for Bure and gave up nothing! What a great trade. We got Anson Carter and gave up nothing! What a great move. Just what the team needs. We traded for Jagr and gave up nothing! What a great trade!! We traded for St. Louis!! WOW, what a great trade.

Except, except, except.....he does not really make this team a contender does he? he does not mask the many flaws that mar the team. Heck, Jackass himself said it yesterday when asked if the Rangers were a Cup contender. He did not say yes. He just said that they are capable now of going further than before. Isn't this the same idiot who said that the goal each year is to win the Cup? That anything but is failure?

We know this path all too well. Once the Rangers exit the playoffs again, knee jerk moves will be made to address perceived flaws. And why? Because Jackass has now made this a WIN NOW team. One that has to win it all either this year or next. That is frightening. That leads to trading of more picks and more prospects in order to WIN NOW. The off season moves will be done to WIN NOW. Who will be the new version of Holik? Kasperitis? Oliwa?

Moves done in a vacuum. Without any thought of the future. Without any thought of a plan. Without any plotting of a course. As of today, we do not have a first round pick in 2 of the next 4 years. There is a possibility that can move to 3 out of 4 years. Is this what the Rangers can afford. Haven't we been there, done that already?

Jackass admitted there were two trades. One that helps the team in the future and one that is made for RIGHT NOW. He, as is his mo, went for the instant gratification, preferring long-term pain. We know how this goes. When the moves done to WIN NOW (this year or next) fail, what will the Rangers be left with?

Jackass will retire. Dolan will bring in Gretzky to GM. Or better yet, Messier to be coach and Gretzky to be GM. And the long, long road to another 54 years will continue.

And this one will last a life time. Indeed.
Click to read more...
 
Sather. Rinse. Repeat.

Will never change until he abdicates the throne in 10-15 years
 
Man you really went for the dramatic, poignant finish there. 10/10. Looking at the holes that are there and the ones that are filled I have to say I'm happy with the team at this very moment though I acknowledge it could all fail and come crumbling down. 2 years from now we could all be screaming about the country club atmosphere and how Kreider's 4th concussion derailed a promising career while Hank hits IR for hip issues for the 6th time since that infamous ECF series where we were up 3-1 and then collapsed with IR replacement Talbot in net. Unfortunately making the ECF meant we gave up a 1st to TB instead of a 2nd so it hurts even more.

Nashs also a shell of himself after a few more concussions and has been reduced to a 3rd line checking role (hey he did it in the olympics) so we have a hip addled Hank for 6 more years, a mind-addled Nash for another 5 and Richards trying his best (which is 40-50 pts a year with no D) for another 4. Capt. Cally is also here for another 4 because we signed him in FA to the 6 x 6.5 deal he wanted with a NMC. And yes he's broken down. Just like most people thought
 
True Blue said:
And this one will last a lifetime. It sure will. Because it is moves like yesterday's that remind me over and over again about why it is that the Rangers are among the least successful franchises in NHL history. Heck, maybe all of sports.

We are now over a third of the way to another 54 years without a Cup. We have had what, one Cup victory, several Cup finals appearances and a handful of conference finals in effectively 75 years? Since '94, who is worse than the Rangers? The Oilers? Islanders? Panthers? What sterling, pristine company that is.

Haven't we seen the script for this before? We traded for Bure and gave up nothing! What a great trade. We got Anson Carter and gave up nothing! What a great move. Just what the team needs. We traded for Jagr and gave up nothing! What a great trade!! We traded for St. Louis!! WOW, what a great trade.

Except, except, except.....he does not really make this team a contender does he? he does not mask the many flaws that mar the team. Heck, Jackass himself said it yesterday when asked if the Rangers were a Cup contender. He did not say yes. He just said that they are capable now of going further than before. Isn't this the same idiot who said that the goal each year is to win the Cup? That anything but is failure?

We know this path all too well. Once the Rangers exit the playoffs again, knee jerk moves will be made to address perceived flaws. And why? Because Jackass has now made this a WIN NOW team. One that has to win it all either this year or next. That is frightening. That leads to trading of more picks and more prospects in order to WIN NOW. The off season moves will be done to WIN NOW. Who will be the new version of Holik? Kasperitis? Oliwa?

Moves done in a vacuum. Without any thought of the future. Without any thought of a plan. Without any plotting of a course. As of today, we do not have a first round pick in 2 of the next 4 years. There is a possibility that can move to 3 out of 4 years. Is this what the Rangers can afford. Haven't we been there, done that already?

Jackass admitted there were two trades. One that helps the team in the future and one that is made for RIGHT NOW. He, as is his mo, went for the instant gratification, preferring long-term pain. We know how this goes. When the moves done to WIN NOW (this year or next) fail, what will the Rangers be left with?

Jackass will retire. Dolan will bring in Gretzky to GM. Or better yet, Messier to be coach and Gretzky to be GM. And the long, long road to another 54 years will continue.

And this one will last a life time. Indeed.
Click to expand...

Definitely a good chance I'll be dead the next time they win the Stanley Cup. Those banners from '94--'Now I can die in peace' etc. etc.--seem apropos considering the current circumstances.
 
Yeah it was very telling what Sather said in the press conference about having two deals lined up and taking the "better" one. I really wish i knew what the other deal with the Sharks was. Hertl? Prospect? A first coming our way? Second?

While this deal is the better deal, short term - im sure - because you are getting the top point getter of the past 3 seasons and the defending Art Ross Trophy winner - It reeks of mismanagement and disorganization, and pretty much enlightens us all of our worst assumption - there really IS NO PLAN!

If they were committed to a vision of how they want to build this team going into the future, why would they have 2 vastly different deals on the table? I understand that not every team in the league was in on Callahan and there were only a few options. But the great teams that win, understand their needs and wants and execute it via trade or signing.

The very fact that Sather suggested that he had a backup deal in place that was completely opposite shows that he doesnt have a plan - why would he admit to that? Because he is lazy and chooses what comes to him. He looks at the FA list and sees what he can buy. No advanced scouting. He sees the best short term option and has no thought of patience. He mentioned the Sharks deal like it was no big deal - Aaaaahh its just down the road. 1st round picks are overrated anyway.... While I tend to think that first rounders arent AS critical as many here make them out to be (especially for the Rangers), that isnt the point here at all. ITs not the debate. The debate is the lack of a PLAN.

Even though not signing Callahan will open the cap a few years down the road, thats extra gravy for him to vindicate the deal. I would have been more understanding to the deal if Sather flat out said - we want to win now, because of A. B. C and D. He didnt say that. He doesnt have a master plan. And it shouldnt come as a surprise.
 
Last edited:
True Blue said:
And this one will last a lifetime. It sure will. Because it is moves like yesterday's that remind me over and over again about why it is that the Rangers are among the least successful franchises in NHL history. Heck, maybe all of sports.

We are now over a third of the way to another 54 years without a Cup. We have had what, one Cup victory, several Cup finals appearances and a handful of conference finals in effectively 75 years? Since '94, who is worse than the Rangers? The Oilers? Islanders? Panthers? What sterling, pristine company that is.

Haven't we seen the script for this before? We traded for Bure and gave up nothing! What a great trade. We got Anson Carter and gave up nothing! What a great move. Just what the team needs. We traded for Jagr and gave up nothing! What a great trade!! We traded for St. Louis!! WOW, what a great trade.

Except, except, except.....he does not really make this team a contender does he? he does not mask the many flaws that mar the team. Heck, Jackass himself said it yesterday when asked if the Rangers were a Cup contender. He did not say yes. He just said that they are capable now of going further than before. Isn't this the same idiot who said that the goal each year is to win the Cup? That anything but is failure?

We know this path all too well. Once the Rangers exit the playoffs again, knee jerk moves will be made to address perceived flaws. And why? Because Jackass has now made this a WIN NOW team. One that has to win it all either this year or next. That is frightening. That leads to trading of more picks and more prospects in order to WIN NOW. The off season moves will be done to WIN NOW. Who will be the new version of Holik? Kasperitis? Oliwa?

Moves done in a vacuum. Without any thought of the future. Without any thought of a plan. Without any plotting of a course. As of today, we do not have a first round pick in 2 of the next 4 years. There is a possibility that can move to 3 out of 4 years. Is this what the Rangers can afford. Haven't we been there, done that already?

Jackass admitted there were two trades. One that helps the team in the future and one that is made for RIGHT NOW. He, as is his mo, went for the instant gratification, preferring long-term pain. We know how this goes. When the moves done to WIN NOW (this year or next) fail, what will the Rangers be left with?

Jackass will retire. Dolan will bring in Gretzky to GM. Or better yet, Messier to be coach and Gretzky to be GM. And the long, long road to another 54 years will continue.

And this one will last a life time. Indeed.
Click to expand...

It's absurd at this point. Hearing TLB last night made me sick. "How often do you get a chance to acquire a player like Martin St. Louis?"

  • August 20, 2001- "How often do you get a chance to acquire a player like Eric Lindros?"
  • March 18, 2002 - "How often do you get a chance to acquire a player like Pavel Bure?"
  • February 10, 2003 - "How often do you get a chance to acquire a player like Alex Kovalev?"
  • January 23, 2004 - "How often do you get a chance to acquire a player like Jaromir Jagr?"
  • July 1, 2007 - "How often do you get a chance to acquire a player like Scott Gomz?"
  • July 1, 2007 - "How often do you get a chance to acquire a player like Chris Drury?"
  • July 1, 2008 - "How often do you get a chance to acquire a player like Wade Redden?"
  • July 3, 2008 - "How often do you get a chance to acquire a player like Markus Naslund?"
  • July 2, 2011 - "How often do you get a chance to acquire a player like Brad Richards?"
  • July 24, 2012 - "How often do you get a chance to acquire a player like Rick Nash?"

The better question should be how many times should you be allowed to trade guys like Brian Leetch and Ryan Callahan?
 
No offense but Cally should not even be mentioned in the same breath as Leetch.
 
Not to get me wrong. St. Louis is still a legit 1st line player and even at 38 I think there's a pretty good possibility he he has 3-4-5 good years left.

The problems are the cap costs--the pretend 1st liners like Richards or the disappear for stretches 1st liners like Nash and the farm, draft and player development areas being raided to pay for it all. Posters here *****ed when we came in around 25 or so for prospect depth by the HF people but the truth is--the Rangers have 5 or 6 legit prospects in Hartford and maybe 3 or 4 between the CHL, the colleges and Europe. There are teams that are a lot better at the NHL level than ours and are a lot, lot deeper than ours in prospect depth.

Anyway I don't see this team beating the Bruins to come out of the east. A real reach to beat the Penguins but the Bruins are just going to kick our collective *****. To beat the Bruins you have to be willing to grind 60 minutes a night--keep the goals down. This team does not have the physical capability to do that.
 
I pretty much agree with the whole premise of this thread.

The Rangers never stick to anything long enough to be a real contender. The only thing consistent is them bringing in marketable past their prime players.
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway said:
It's absurd at this point. Hearing TLB last night made me sick. "How often do you get a chance to acquire a player like Martin St. Louis?"

  • August 20, 2001- "How often do you get a chance to acquire a player like Eric Lindros?"
  • March 18, 2002 - "How often do you get a chance to acquire a player like Pavel Bure?"
  • February 10, 2003 - "How often do you get a chance to acquire a player like Alex Kovalev?"
  • January 23, 2004 - "How often do you get a chance to acquire a player like Jaromir Jagr?"
  • July 1, 2007 - "How often do you get a chance to acquire a player like Scott Gomz?"
  • July 1, 2007 - "How often do you get a chance to acquire a player like Chris Drury?"
  • July 1, 2008 - "How often do you get a chance to acquire a player like Wade Redden?"
  • July 3, 2008 - "How often do you get a chance to acquire a player like Markus Naslund?"
  • July 2, 2011 - "How often do you get a chance to acquire a player like Brad Richards?"
  • July 24, 2012 - "How often do you get a chance to acquire a player like Rick Nash?"

The better question should be how many times should you be allowed to trade guys like Brian Leetch and Ryan Callahan?
Click to expand...

That's all pomp and show for the TV audience b/c sports are an entertainment business and that's how you sell the product. Unfortunately they don't care if it makes you sick. You're a fanatic, they've got you and your dollars and your ratings. They play up things like that for the casuals. Some of those players deserved that line, others didn't. I've been streaming all year. Not even giving them ratings.
 
HockeyBasedNYC said:
The debate is the lack of a PLAN.
Click to expand...
That is it exactly. And the lack of vision. Moves in a vacuum that just put lipstick on a pig.

Sather is going all in on this year and next. And the moves will reflect it. He has no idea of how to win anymore. The Rangers will be paying for this trade and all of the moves for next year for the next decade.
 
eco's bones said:
To beat the Bruins you have to be willing to grind 60 minutes a night--keep the goals down. This team does not have the physical capability to do that.
Click to expand...
Not just them. But also the Pens and Tampa. Heck, not sure how this team survives 7 games against Ottawa.
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway said:
It's absurd at this point. Hearing TLB last night made me sick. "How often do you get a chance to acquire a player like Martin St. Louis?"

  • August 20, 2001- "How often do you get a chance to acquire a player like Eric Lindros?"
  • March 18, 2002 - "How often do you get a chance to acquire a player like Pavel Bure?"
  • February 10, 2003 - "How often do you get a chance to acquire a player like Alex Kovalev?"
  • January 23, 2004 - "How often do you get a chance to acquire a player like Jaromir Jagr?"
  • July 1, 2007 - "How often do you get a chance to acquire a player like Scott Gomz?"
  • July 1, 2007 - "How often do you get a chance to acquire a player like Chris Drury?"
  • July 1, 2008 - "How often do you get a chance to acquire a player like Wade Redden?"
  • July 3, 2008 - "How often do you get a chance to acquire a player like Markus Naslund?"
  • July 2, 2011 - "How often do you get a chance to acquire a player like Brad Richards?"
  • July 24, 2012 - "How often do you get a chance to acquire a player like Rick Nash?"

The better question should be how many times should you be allowed to trade guys like Brian Leetch and Ryan Callahan?
Click to expand...

Ryan Callahan =/= Brian Leetch

They are no where close as players.
 
shinchanyo said:
That's all pomp and show for the TV audience b/c sports are an entertainment business and that's how you sell the product.
Click to expand...

In this case I TOTALLY disagree. For the Rangers the product sells itself...no Ranger fan needs Glen Sather's spin to make them re-up their season tickets. They do it because that's what Ranger fans do.

It's about your record, and Sather's record of winning is not good.
 
Agree completely. He continues to discard draft picks like they are used tissues. Going for it? LOL. We will be lucky to win one round, and are done like dinner whenever the series against Boston or Pittsburgh happens. He throws away the first rounder in the McDavid draft. As a bubble team, we are never far from the lottery. Can you imagine? McDavid in Tampa? Richards should be gone, no guarantee of playoffs this year or next. Clearly, the goal is to get Dolan his revenue for 2 or 3 home playoff games. It is not to win the cup.
 
Last edited:
True Blue said:
And this one will last a lifetime. It sure will. Because it is moves like yesterday's that remind me over and over again about why it is that the Rangers are among the least successful franchises in NHL history. Heck, maybe all of sports.

We are now over a third of the way to another 54 years without a Cup. We have had what, one Cup victory, several Cup finals appearances and a handful of conference finals in effectively 75 years? Since '94, who is worse than the Rangers? The Oilers? Islanders? Panthers? What sterling, pristine company that is.

Haven't we seen the script for this before? We traded for Bure and gave up nothing! What a great trade. We got Anson Carter and gave up nothing! What a great move. Just what the team needs. We traded for Jagr and gave up nothing! What a great trade!! We traded for St. Louis!! WOW, what a great trade.

Except, except, except.....he does not really make this team a contender does he? he does not mask the many flaws that mar the team. Heck, Jackass himself said it yesterday when asked if the Rangers were a Cup contender. He did not say yes. He just said that they are capable now of going further than before. Isn't this the same idiot who said that the goal each year is to win the Cup? That anything but is failure?

We know this path all too well. Once the Rangers exit the playoffs again, knee jerk moves will be made to address perceived flaws. And why? Because Jackass has now made this a WIN NOW team. One that has to win it all either this year or next. That is frightening. That leads to trading of more picks and more prospects in order to WIN NOW. The off season moves will be done to WIN NOW. Who will be the new version of Holik? Kasperitis? Oliwa?

Moves done in a vacuum. Without any thought of the future. Without any thought of a plan. Without any plotting of a course. As of today, we do not have a first round pick in 2 of the next 4 years. There is a possibility that can move to 3 out of 4 years. Is this what the Rangers can afford. Haven't we been there, done that already?

Jackass admitted there were two trades. One that helps the team in the future and one that is made for RIGHT NOW. He, as is his mo, went for the instant gratification, preferring long-term pain. We know how this goes. When the moves done to WIN NOW (this year or next) fail, what will the Rangers be left with?

Jackass will retire. Dolan will bring in Gretzky to GM. Or better yet, Messier to be coach and Gretzky to be GM. And the long, long road to another 54 years will continue.

And this one will last a life time. Indeed.
Click to expand...

If this were on twitter, I would retweet and favorite it. This is so accurate, it's sad that things have come to this.
 
25.88888

What this number represents is the average age of our top six point leaders this season and our top 4 defense man. This number does include Richards, and does not include St Louis, or Hagelin, Jt Miller or any prospects.

This is the average age of our core, now how much younger do you really think we could get? This idea that we have to win this year or next is crazy.

That was the case if Dubinsky and Callahan were still our core as that window would be closing. The players from that team are gone now. We have a new core to build around, a younger core.
 
Bullseyes said:
Ryan Callahan =/= Brian Leetch

They are no where close as players.
Click to expand...

Agreed, but I think SBOB is trying to point out the pattern on the mindset of our GM. Going for the big name players rarely works (Jagr). He should be learning from those trades, not adding to them.
 
Jersey Girl said:
Sather. Rinse. Repeat.

Will never change until he abdicates the throne in 10-15 years
Click to expand...
I wish that were true, I feel the next GM will just rinse and repeat as well.

It's a good business model, look at the First Impressions of St. Louis poll, Look at the Richards polls before and after signed him, look at the Clowe reaction, the Nash one, apparently most fans like these moves.

The team may sell itself but these moves help sell it better.

Building a real contender is difficult, selling this team is easy, keeping the lines on the money graphs all pointing in the right direction at an even higher incline, make move like these.
 
HockeyBasedNYC said:
If they were committed to a vision of how they want to build this team going into the future, why would they have 2 vastly different deals on the table? I understand that not every team in the league was in on Callahan and there were only a few options. But the great teams that win, understand their needs and wants and execute it via trade or signing.

The very fact that Sather suggested that he had a backup deal in place that was completely opposite shows that he doesnt have a plan - why would he admit to that? Because he is lazy and chooses what comes to him. He looks at the FA list and sees what he can buy. No advanced scouting. He sees the best short term option and has no thought of patience.
.
Click to expand...


Really good post top to bottom but this was especially unsettling. Not surprising but really just awful. How anyone can consider this competent management is unbelievable. Most important trade in recent memory and there is no plan for what the end goal should be. Leads to more of the same.
 
I do agree with you to an extent. We have to realize something though. Lundqvist is 32. He has maybe 3-4 more years at this level before he starts to decline. He is an elite goaltender. Nash has 4 more years on his contract. Girardi will be 34 in 4 years. 3 of our core pieces will be at that age of decline or will be up for a new contract.

Im not necessarily saying I agree with Sathers decision to trade two potential 1sts for St. Louis. However, I can't really be mad at him for wanting to go for it within the next 4-5 years. Granted it has been an off year but Lundqvist is the backbone of this team and has been for what 9 seasons? If we have any chance at a cup, we need an elite goaltender. We just aren't built from prototypical lottery mode that Pittsburgh & Chicago have come from.

So again, do I see it going for it right now as the right move? No. Was it the worst move? No. Our window is within the next 4-5 years because after that, Henrik Lundqvist will slowly decline and the greatest goaltender our organization has ever seen will be just a few years short of retirement.

I have seen many posts about how we should have signed Callahan. That he did a lot for this organization and that Sather should have been loyal to his captain who has played so hard for this franchise. Look at the flip side (whether it is stupid or not), this is Sather being loyal to his star goaltender and the man who has been the Rangers for 9 seasons.

We have an elite goaltender, an at worst top 5 defense, a top 10 PP and a top 10 PK. 10 years ago we would have given anything to have 1-2 of those, let alone all. If Rick Nash can pull his head out of his ass in the playoffs we really can compete with anyone. Especially in the east. Boston would be tough but I like our depth this year much better than last year when going up against them in a series. Pittsburgh has a goaltender with the mental stability of a snow pea. A defense that with or without Letang is just :lol: worthy. Philly? Mason won't stand on his head every game. That team with or without MacDonald is a joke. Toronto? Last nights game is hardly indicative of anything with 3 of the 4 goals coming from a penalty shot and being short handed. Western Conference? Yeah they are a bit tougher. We beat Chicago TWICE. Once with our back up. The only team that truly worries me out West is St. Louis. St. Louis has a great defense like us, a great goaltender like us and a better offense. They are the only team that I think we would have a slim chance of beating in a 7 game series. All the others? I like our odds.

Maybe I am a wild optimist. Who knows. I guess being a fan of this team has taught me a few things. Never be surprised and always hope for the best (considering I became a fan during the dark years starting around 1998). If you don't make this trade what do you do then? Take the package that would help for the future which would lead to this team continuing to be a borderline good team for another few years and waste Lundqvists final good years while you toil away in mediocrity as you attempt to "re tool" or look at the big picture? The big picture is Henrik Lundqvist folks. Always has been and will be until he retires.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom