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.
Imagine the players they probably could have traded for with all the assets they gave for MSL, Nash, Clowe?

Callahan
Dubinsky
Anisimov
Two 1sts, at least
Erixon who cost two 2nds
2 other 2nds
3rd
5th
Probably more that I am missing and the conditionals

It's more than the Leafs gave up for Kessel at the time they did not know they'd be two top picks.

More than Kovalchuk and Hossa combined when they were traded.

More than the Devils gave up for a pretty good starting goalie.

Seems like that package sure could have returned far better assets than MSL, Nash, a weak prospect pool and a slim shot at contention for a couple years.
 
Off Sides said:
Imagine the players they probably could have traded for with all the assets they gave for MSL, Nash, Clowe?

Callahan
Dubinsky
Anisimov
Two 1sts, at least
Erixon who cost two 2nds
2 other 2nds
3rd
5th
Probably more that I am missing and the conditionals

It's more than the Leafs gave up for Kessel at the time they did not know they'd be two top picks.

More than Kovalchuk and Hossa combined when they were traded.

More than the Devils gave up for a pretty good starting goalie.

Seems like that package sure could have returned far better assets than MSL, Nash, a weak prospect pool and a slim shot at contention for a couple years.
Click to expand...

You can't really compare rentals with signed players. And none of those assets had the value of the Leafs first round picks. It's a bit too easy to just summarise everything we gave up in three trades, compare it with completely different trades and say: we should've done that or that trade. I mean, why stop with what you said? We could've easily gotten Rask, as Raycroft is a far inferior return. Or Sharp, or...
 
McRanger said:
I don't find stats manipulation or intellectual dishonesty a laughing matter.

I've yet to see ONE reason why the 1967 Rangers failure isn't relevant to today's team. Just because that team is a LITTLE different than the one we have have now? Because SOME of the players might be dead? Because they still wore sansabelt slacks back then?

Well I'm not 100% convinced all those guys are really even dead.

I don't see why someone can't look at the '67 Rangers... and immediately know that we will lose to Detroit tomorrow.

It's all about sample size. The bigger the better. Context be damned.
Click to expand...

One of the funniest things I have read on HF. Well done.

G5 said:
79 years of history has no relevance to this hockey team, but the last 8 or so do?

"1967 is irroneous, because it doesn't suit my agenda, but 2005 does" How?

The only players still on this club from 2008-09 are Girardi, Staal, and Lundqvist. If the players in 1967 have nothing to do with this team's ability to win in 2014, then neither do the players from 2008-09. Move up a year to 2009-10 and the only other guy is Boyle. In the last 4 years the roster went through a complete overhaul.

This management group, for the most part, is the same one that brought in Gomez, Drury, Redden. The same one that brought in Lindros, Holik, and Bure before that. And soon enough, Nash, Richards, and St. louis will be lumped in with them. Its the same nonsense.

"Forget our flaws and glaring holes and weaknesses, we are contenders!" And I've got a bride to sell you.

You think you are schooling people by trying to convince others that this is some model franchise of success, but you aren't. Hockey isn't played on your calculator. 1998 through 2004 was a myth to you, we know, because you were too young to know.

Meanwhile, the people who have been through this song and dance for decades can teach you about the reality of this situation.

Reality: They have no real #1 center. No real offensive defenseman. No size.No grit. Poor board play. Not a strong enough forecheck. They get pushed around by heavier teams. They don't have the same accountability under Vigneault. There is little urgency and intensity. A few guys won't cut it. The entire team needs to pull its weight. Thats the reality.
Click to expand...

Great post.
 
Go back two seasons.

Would you have traded Dubinsky, Anisimov and Callahan for Nash and MSL?

Yes.

Go back to the 2012 offseason.

Would you have traded Dubinsky, Anisimov and Callahan for Nash and MSL?

Yes.

My issue is with the picks. He's going to screw this franchise the way Dolan did the Knicks.
 
jniklast said:
So you expect at least one great trade every other year? How many GMs have been able to do that in the past?
Click to expand...

Who is talking about great trades? You brought up a defenseman who was a prospect throw in when he was acquired.

I was talking about young, impact forwards. Why isnt Sather making trades to acquire young players with star potential?

The McDonagh trade. One trade. GM for 14 years.

A broken clock is right twice a day.
 
haohmaru said:
We need a little perspective here. It's a 30 team league now.

The storied Oilers haven't won a cup since the 80's
The Islanders haven't won a playoff series since before we won a cup
The Flyers haven't won a cup since the 70's.
Calgary? 80's
St. Louis? Never
Phoenix? Winnipeg? Buffalo? Minnesota? San Jose? Florida? Columbus? Vancouver? Nashville? Capitals?

Some of these teams haven't even smelled a conference finals. 3.33% success rate among all NHL franchises if a cup is your measure of success. Highly unlikely to be successful.
Click to expand...

This reminds me of rangers fans in 1989 who used to say, "well look at the hawks and Leafs and Wings...they havent won in a long time as well."

The playoffs are nice. But we have an owner and GM who are completely unaccountable and sit in an ivory tower.

The fans deserve to know the way ahead. What's the strategy? When Neil Smith came in, he had a Dynasty Islanders pedigree and was a protege of Bill Torre. He said his goal was to win the division. Then the Cup. Costly as it was, at least you knew there was a framework in place.

Sather is never available. Never. This is the most tight-lipped organization in the city. More than the Giants. More than the Yankees. More than the Knicks.

The Blues and Bruins both had streaks of like 25 or 30 years in a row where they made the playoffs. Great for ticket sales and ratings. Bad for hungry fans and hungry players.

No accountability. Sather goes on about his way and reports to nobody. No worries about the press. No worries about backlash. No worries.

Sather is lucky the Knicks are a hot mess. Makes his situation look like Jerry Krauss in 1992.
 
I'm not sure if this is a thread of trolls or not.

But anyway, this incompetency we have seen from this organization is staggering. And I don't mean no cup wins. I mean failure to build a team sans torts. Yes, Torts built a team. Whether you like it or not. But the majority of slats' time here we have had no identity and almost an ever revolving door of coaches and moving high round picks, relying on a thin pipeline. That isn't a good way to go especially when you may end up choosing a bust or a huge project in the first round.

Now, let's get to the big one. Free agents. We suck at signing them. Overpaid and they age away or suck when they come here and they're equipped with a large cap per year. If you say it inhibits us from competing to a degree, you're Right. Since what, now just about 10 years ago was the strike... Now there's a salary cap and all those goodies. The perpetual failure to slot in above 6 7 or 8 is staggering. So long as they run this organization the way they do, we aren't seeing any hardware coming this way.

No one is accountable in the front office. There is no plan. Just quiet down and maintain the status quo, slats. It doesn't help that Dolan Pls is a stupid ass. I'm glad he doesn't touch the Rangers, but Sather doing it in the same manner for 13 years is almost as bad as if Dolan Pls was doing it.
 
Last edited:
Off Sides said:
Imagine the players they probably could have traded for with all the assets they gave for MSL, Nash, Clowe?

Callahan
Dubinsky
Anisimov
Two 1sts, at least
Erixon who cost two 2nds
2 other 2nds
3rd
5th
Probably more that I am missing and the conditionals
Click to expand...


(1) Of all the players/assets you listed, the two best pieces are still Nash and MSL.
(2) We already had all of Callahan/Dubi/Ani... and they didnt get us to the the cup. What makes you think they would have this year?

We had a roster full of gritty 2-way players, but you need talent to win. Thats what MSL and Nash are.
 
Tyler Seguin is 21.

He's on pace for 37 goals and 83 points.

Would you have traded Stepan, Kreider and McIlrath for Seguin?

No need to answer. I know the answers already.
 
I still hate that we traded Artie. I hate that we traded Dubs an THEN got rid of Torts. If we were getting rid of Torts we should not have gotten rid of Dubs.

Giving up Artie though was too much for Nash. he was demanding out, they HAD to get rid of him. I'd have traded another 1st and another prospect before Artie. He was super cheap. He was great on both ends of the ice, he could play C and he could shift over to LW and still play great and from day 1 I thought he was the type of player to mesh perfecly on a line with Nash (and now MSL) find the open space while Nash/MSL draws the coverage and unleash that monster shot. I still love that we traded for Nash and I blame Gabs and Rich a helluva lot more for last year being crappy compared to 11-12 but damn that doesn't mean I don't have some regrets with that trade
 
Silence Of The Plams said:
I'm not sure if this is a thread of trolls or not.

But anyway, this incompetency we have seen from this organization is staggering. And I don't mean no cup wins. I mean failure to build a team sans torts. Yes, Torts built a team. Whether you like it or not. But the majority of slats' time here we have had no identity and almost an ever revolving door of coaches and moving high round picks, relying on a thin pipeline. That isn't a good way to go especially when you may end up choosing a bust or a huge project in the first round.

Now, let's get to the big one. Free agents. We suck at signing them. Overpaid and they age away or suck when they come here and they're equipped with a large cap per year. If you say it inhibits us from competing to a degree, you're Right. Since what, now just about 10 years ago was the strike... Now there's a salary cap and all those goodies. The perpetual failure to slot in above 6 7 or 8 is staggering. So long as they run this organization the way they do, we aren't seeing any hardware coming this way.

No one is accountable in the front office. There is no plan. Just quiet down and maintain the status quo, slats. It doesn't help that Dolan Pls is a stupid ass. I'm glad he doesn't touch the Rangers, but Sather doing it in the same manner for 13 years is almost as bad as if Dolan Pls was doing it.
Click to expand...

Great post.

Let's say in a different world Dolan was lucky enough to stumble across a competent GM back in 2000. Doesn't even matter who for the sake of this post, just a good GM. One who was doing a good job between then and now.

Like he's doing with Sather, Dolan would let that GM do whatever he wants, sign who he wants, trade who he wants, and draft who he wants, without any intrusion whatsoever. All Dolan would do (like he does with Sather) is provide as much money the NHL allows him to provide.

Sounds good, right? We would actually be lauding Dolan as one of the best owners in hockey - while, ironically, basketball fans are vilifying him as one of the worst owners in basketball. Kinda funny.

Of course Dolan did not find a competent GM, he found a man who was past his prime even 14 years ago, who he lets do anything he wants without intrusion. Sather is 14 years into what will historically be looked back on as a failed tenure of running a franchise, and he probably has a good 5-10 years left. We're talking up to a quarter of a century of ineptitude here, people!

Just find this whole dynamic very interesting - not to mention obviously painful!
 
Bleed Ranger Blue said:
Bingo.

Not to mention the middle of the lineup became depleted to get Nash and MSL. In other words, you're adding these all-star talents to a flawed roster. Whats the point?
Click to expand...

The MSl trade didn't deplete the middle of our lineup and we have Nash for 6 years so you can build around the player after maybe 1 or 2 bad seasons with a depleted middle. It doesn't have to be immediate gratification. That said our top 3 was gutted by two superstar no shows. That hurt more than losing two players from the middle of the lineup in a trade

And as I said I hate that we let AA go. Think that was a bad move. But since none of us can predict what gabs and BR would become AND since Nash and BR were signed to such long term deals you can see where the thought might be (Hey even if we don't win in 12-13 we can fill those middle spots by 13-14 or 14-15 and still have Nash and BR). Unfortunately Gabs and BR decided to dropoff a cliff.

Our middle has hags, Kreider, MZA, Brass and either Step or BR (depending on lineup). It isn't THAT hard to find guys for the middle lines. What IS difficult is finding legitimate top line talents and when the team is solidly built you almost HAVE to rock the foundations a little bit in order to risk finding a top talent.

We've done it all without even touching our solidly built D. I question the D system we are implementing but the players are more than enough to win with on D and in net.
 
Last edited:
GWOW said:
Tyler Seguin is 21.

He's on pace for 37 goals and 83 points.

Would you have traded Stepan, Kreider and McIlrath for Seguin?

No need to answer. I know the answers already.
Click to expand...

I think these are the types of trades the organization should be looking into.
 
shinchanyo said:
The MSl trade didn't deplete the middle of our lineup and we have Nash for 6 years so you can build around the player after maybe 1 or 2 bad seasons with a depleted middle. It doesn't have to be immediate gratification. That said our top 3 was gutted by two superstar no shows. That hurt more than losing two players from the middle of the lineup in a trade
Click to expand...

I know Ryan Callahan is public enemy #1 around here after the contract squabble, but missing him for the rest of the year is a blow to the middle of the lineup. Not sure how you can say otherwise.

Is MSL better? Sure he is....at scoring.
 
shinchanyo said:
The MSl trade didn't deplete the middle of our lineup and we have Nash for 6 years so you can build around the player after maybe 1 or 2 bad seasons with a depleted middle. It doesn't have to be immediate gratification. That said our top 3 was gutted by two superstar no shows. That hurt more than losing two players from the middle of the lineup in a trade

And as I said I hate that we let AA go. Think that was a bad move. But since none of us can predict what gabs and BR would become AND since Nash and BR were signed to such long term deals you can see where the thought might be (Hey even if we don't win in 12-13 we can fill those middle spots by 13-14 or 14-15 and still have Nash and BR). Unfortunately Gabs and BR decided to dropoff a cliff.

Our middle has hags, Kreider, MZA, Brass and either Step or BR (depending on lineup). It isn't THAT hard to find guys for the middle lines. What IS difficult is finding legitamate top line talents and when the team is solidly built you almost HAVE to rock the foundations a little bit in order to risk finding a top talent
Click to expand...

I agree with what you added at the bottom. Its a lot easier to build a lineup when you start with the hard things.

That said, right wings who want out of their organization via trade is the only option?
 
Bleed Ranger Blue said:
LOL. Great post.

I thought the SAME thing to myself when they flashed MSL's credentials on the screen last night. 6 time all-star. Former Hart Trophy winner, former this, former that.

You know what it means to me? They've usually been in the league too long and had their best days with other teams.
Click to expand...

I just wish we would trade for future trophy winners, instead of former trophy winners.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom