What you're referring to as rebuilding, I would call draft picks working out. Had Brendl and Lundmark lived up to draft day expectations or Falardeau, Jonasen or any number of other draft busts panned out and become NHL contributors, then you could argue the Rangers were rebuilding back then just as easily. The signing of Jagr and his Czech Posse after the lockout was a quick fix that worked and after them you still had off seasons where more than one big ticket free agent was brought in and I have a hard time calling those seasons part of a rebuild. In the end what we finally have is an organization that operates like a solid one. We have drafted better, developed players better, been more selective with free agents and trades. That's the formula for success in the NHL - doing most things right and not overloading on one avenue to acquire talent. I'm not saying the Rangers are perfect or making all the right moves but after the Redden signing, I think they've gone about business the right way.
Sather Speaks
- Thread starter Crease
- Start date
What you're referring to as rebuilding, I would call draft picks working out. Had Brendl and Lundmark lived up to draft day expectations or Falardeau, Jonasen or any number of other draft busts panned out and become NHL contributors, then you could argue the Rangers were rebuilding back then just as easily. The signing of Jagr and his Czech Posse after the lockout was a quick fix that worked and after them you still had off seasons where more than one big ticket free agent was brought in and I have a hard time calling those seasons part of a rebuild. In the end what we finally have is an organization that operates like a solid one. We have drafted better, developed players better, been more selective with free agents and trades. That's the formula for success in the NHL - doing most things right and not overloading on one avenue to acquire talent. I'm not saying the Rangers are perfect or making all the right moves but after the Redden signing, I think they've gone about business the right way.
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
A few points: the acquisition of Jagr and the acquisition of the Czech players weren't simultaneous things. He was brought in, the team planned for a season that was cancelled, and the Czechs were brought in the offseason after the lockout. Further, they weren't brought in to make the team competitive, they were brought in to make Jagr more comfortable in NY. Eco had a good post about the seasons these guys had before they came to NY.
Second, there's a big difference between draft picks panning out and developing players. Every team will have it's share of booms and busts on picks. The good organization develops NHL players in greater abundance. That's the big, big difference in the Rangers organization before and after the lockout. Before the lockout, we had to hope that Brendl or Falardeau panned out. After the lockout, we've been much better at actual planned development, as opposed to winging it. Our farm team has done a much better job. There's more emphasis on rookie camps and Traverse City. There's more emphasis on what these players are doing before they even turn pro. I mean, look at the treatment that Callahan got from draft day on and tell me that Lundmark even got anything near that kind of contact. He didn't. And Lundmark was a highly touted first rounder, Callahan a 4th rounder. It's been a different world.
Lastly, what I call a rebuild is very simple. The prospect system was barren. The team began stockpiling picks and young players. This has nothing to do with what free agents a team signs. It has everything to do with holding onto your youth and, as in the last paragraph, developing them into pros. In the early Sather years, the Rangers traded:
a 24 year old winger who had 64 points the prior season
a 25 year old defenseman who had just established himself as an NHL player
a 20 year old 4th overall pick who hadn't broken into the NHL yet
a 22 year old 7th overall pick trying to find his game
a 22 year old winger looking to break into the league
a 20 year old defensive prospect
a 26 year old established winger
a 26 year old 2nd line winger
a 21 year old center
a 22 year old burgeoning defenseman who had some injury issues
a 25 year old D on the cusp of making the league
1st, 3rd, 4th and 5th picks
in deals centered around
a 37 year old D, later traded in the same season
a 30 year old center with concussion history, hadn't even played the previous year
a 31 year old winger with no knees
a 31 year old 2nd line winger
a 30 year old winger reacquistion
a 29 year old underachiever
a 30 year old goalie
Except for 5th rounder for Gusarov, Sather doesn't make many of those kinds of deals anymore, Clowe and Nash deals being exceptions. Maybe Derek Morris too.
OverTheCap
Registered User
- Jan 3, 2009
- 10,454
- 184
Agreed, part of the reason why that team was so successful was because they played better than the sum of their parts. There was a cohesiveness and team mentality that this year's squad lacked. The Nash trade in addition to some of the other offseason moves definitely disrupted the chemistry and identity of what made the 2011-12 team work so well as a group.
Tawnos- Excellent stuff!
Also, we "retooled" pretty heavily a few years before the rebuild. We got Malhotra, very highly regarded. Jamie Lundmark, a 7th overall pick. Pavel Brendl, our future franchise player.
We had no farm to speak of and -- especially -- no form of organization to bring these kids up.
Malhotra came in and was destroyed because he was thrown to the sharks.
Lundmark came in and expected to be a top 2 line player, and complained in media becuase he was -- as a young kid -- played on a third line (!).
Brendl just blew it completely.
People need to remember that when we had drafted a kid that had NHL potential, that kid was -- alone -- in the entire organization. More or less. When Lundmark was brought in in 01', he was the one prospect we had. We had a bunch of plays in HFD and in camp, but Lundmark was more or less then only "kid" who was expected to play in the NHL. There was litterary no "compareable". There was no peer. McIlrath got Noreau and co today. JT Miller got Lindberg on the farm and Stepan in the NHL. There are a bunch of players in the NHL today that has made the journey JT Miller or Lindberg has to make. There was not a single player in the NHL that had made the journey Lundmark had to make.
That caused Lundmark to act out. To not do the right things. Lundmark wasn't Zherdev II, but I would like to state that he probably acted worse than someone like Zherdev acted. Why? There was no rolemodel. There was never a kid who would overtake his position if he didn't do the right things. It must be unthinkable for JT Miller to complain on palying on a 3rd/4th line, Stepan has done it both. How could JTM complain? If JTM doesn't check, a kid his age in Lindberg will hit the ice and do just that. You don't have to be Einstein II to figure out what needs to be done. If you are a 20 y/o on a team on which every other player is extremely big name 10 years older than yourself, you aren't pushed in the same way.
The bottomline, is that -- to rebuild -- we needed to build an organization. You do not build an organization by emptying out and bring in a ton of 18 y/o. Understand me the right way, but you do not want to ban Lord of the flys organization. We had a very bad experience, just a few years earlier, of bringing in prime talent into a horrible situation.
Maloney and Renney worked really hard to put a team that fundamentally could play a style they envisioned would be successful -- so that when a kid was ready he would be put in an evironment he could develop in. I mean, if we have Nyls and JJ in the NHL, and a few kids in the NHL that has made it as role models and a few kids on the farm that are pushing for spots -- what happens to a 19 y/o Pavel Brendl that shows up in camp (and we have had a Adam Graves who has kept in contact and pushed PB before coming to camp)? He could have been a star, wtihout any single doubt. Not a mega star, but a high scoring sniper atleast.
So, we rebuilded the best way we thought it could be done. And I am not second guessing that.
Also, we "retooled" pretty heavily a few years before the rebuild. We got Malhotra, very highly regarded. Jamie Lundmark, a 7th overall pick. Pavel Brendl, our future franchise player.
We had no farm to speak of and -- especially -- no form of organization to bring these kids up.
Malhotra came in and was destroyed because he was thrown to the sharks.
Lundmark came in and expected to be a top 2 line player, and complained in media becuase he was -- as a young kid -- played on a third line (!).
Brendl just blew it completely.
People need to remember that when we had drafted a kid that had NHL potential, that kid was -- alone -- in the entire organization. More or less. When Lundmark was brought in in 01', he was the one prospect we had. We had a bunch of plays in HFD and in camp, but Lundmark was more or less then only "kid" who was expected to play in the NHL. There was litterary no "compareable". There was no peer. McIlrath got Noreau and co today. JT Miller got Lindberg on the farm and Stepan in the NHL. There are a bunch of players in the NHL today that has made the journey JT Miller or Lindberg has to make. There was not a single player in the NHL that had made the journey Lundmark had to make.
That caused Lundmark to act out. To not do the right things. Lundmark wasn't Zherdev II, but I would like to state that he probably acted worse than someone like Zherdev acted. Why? There was no rolemodel. There was never a kid who would overtake his position if he didn't do the right things. It must be unthinkable for JT Miller to complain on palying on a 3rd/4th line, Stepan has done it both. How could JTM complain? If JTM doesn't check, a kid his age in Lindberg will hit the ice and do just that. You don't have to be Einstein II to figure out what needs to be done. If you are a 20 y/o on a team on which every other player is extremely big name 10 years older than yourself, you aren't pushed in the same way.
The bottomline, is that -- to rebuild -- we needed to build an organization. You do not build an organization by emptying out and bring in a ton of 18 y/o. Understand me the right way, but you do not want to ban Lord of the flys organization. We had a very bad experience, just a few years earlier, of bringing in prime talent into a horrible situation.
Maloney and Renney worked really hard to put a team that fundamentally could play a style they envisioned would be successful -- so that when a kid was ready he would be put in an evironment he could develop in. I mean, if we have Nyls and JJ in the NHL, and a few kids in the NHL that has made it as role models and a few kids on the farm that are pushing for spots -- what happens to a 19 y/o Pavel Brendl that shows up in camp (and we have had a Adam Graves who has kept in contact and pushed PB before coming to camp)? He could have been a star, wtihout any single doubt. Not a mega star, but a high scoring sniper atleast.
So, we rebuilded the best way we thought it could be done. And I am not second guessing that.
eco's bones
Registered User
Agree on the Lundmark stuff--the skill and compete were there when he was drafted. I remember the HN blurb in the draft special where they cited one scout saying of Lundmark that after games there would be more stick tape marks on his jersey than anyone else's from all the hacking and whacking and fighting for space he was involved in. Somewhere along the way he lost his compete and he never really fully regained it. There are plenty of examples of skill guys that don't have enough compete. They don't make good NHL players. Often lesser skilled guys who do have that compete/stronger work ethic turn into good players. It's part of what character is.
NickyFotiu
NYR 2026 Cup Champs!
- Sep 29, 2011
- 15,362
- 10,822
I watched Lundmark in a practice after he was sent down to the minors. He stayed and worked on his skating/shooting from multiple angles for a full hour after all the other players left the ice. I can not speak for his career but on that 1 day his work ethic really impressed me.
Not for nothing, it wasn't Lundmark's lack of work ethic that did him in here, it was Messier's 2nd run with us(2000-04) during which he was stealing 20+ minutes a nite icetime as an old, useless player who should have retired when Gretzky did!
fredrikstad
Registered User
For how long has Dolan been the Rangers owner? Who was it before that? And finally, how much money did Dolan have to spend to get The Rangers?
Yeah, after 04', I think that is very likely.
I mean, given the complex nature of this issue I don't think you can talk about a "best" option. We choose the option that was going to work. After missing the PO's for seven -- seven -- straight years its hard to argue against that.
We could have tried to suck as much as possible and get very high picks in 06'-09'. That could have landed us Okposo, Hickey, Filatov and Glennie, or it could have landed us Eric Johnson, Kyle Turris, Bogosian and Brayden Schenn, or it could have landed us Doughty, Kane, Stamkos and co. You never know, other teams are sucking a ton too. No matter what, we stand there in 2010 without having made the PO's for twelve straight years with those pieces. Hank is undoubtedly shelled completely after playing for one of the worst teams in the league for 4 years. We have no platform whatsoever. No identity. Nothing of what we get for free now, is here. And two of those scenariso are where we manage to get 1-4 picks every year for 4 years. That is never a given. All of a sudden you get a 6th or 8th or a 12th pick instead.
JJ, Nyls, Straka, Rucinsky, Rozsival and co got us into the PO's and gave Hank, Callahan, Staal, Girardi and co the start they got in the NHL.
Gomez, Drury and Redden and co helped us go in that direction. I mean, we are not a better team without signing those players and just sitting on the money. You can discuss alternatives, undoubtedly a Kimmo Timmonen would have been a better option than Redden and so forth. But Philly traded to get KT first. Also, Gomez got us McD. Lets not forget that.
The best thing to do for us right after the Cup, would have been to trap. Undoubtedly. Do exactly what NJD did. After a handful of years, all other teams than we were doing it. The "you can't trap in NY"-approch really hurt us.
After say 99'-01', we should have "tanked" rebuilt, because we had nothing to build on.
But to start a very risky tank rebuild after missing the PO's for 7 years, I think that is tremendously risky.
After say 99'-01', we should have "tanked" rebuilt, because we had nothing to build on.
But to start a very risky tank rebuild after missing the PO's for 7 years, I think that is tremendously risky.
Lindberg Cheese
Play at a Medium Pace
For how long has Dolan been the Rangers owner? Who was it before that?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_L._Dolan:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_L._Dolan:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Checketts
He went on to become president and chief executive officer of Madison Square Garden, the company that owns the New York Rangers, New York Knicks, New York Liberty of the WNBA and Madison Square Garden and the MSG television network.[1] In 1997, MSG acquired Radio City Music Hall. From 1998 to 2001, the Rangers failed to make the playoffs four straight seasons despite having one of the highest payrolls in the NHL.
fredrikstad
Registered User
OverTheCap
Registered User
- Jan 3, 2009
- 10,454
- 184
I think the Rangers were owned by Viacom (formerly Paramount Pictures/Gulf+Western) before they were sold to Cablevision.
Speaking of Checketts, he currently does some work for the Yankees. I have a friend who met him and Checketts said that the Yankees and MSG are like night and day operations-wise. The Yankees run a tight ship and are very professional, while MSG under Dolan... not so much. Can't say I'm surprised.
Speaking of Checketts, he currently does some work for the Yankees. I have a friend who met him and Checketts said that the Yankees and MSG are like night and day operations-wise. The Yankees run a tight ship and are very professional, while MSG under Dolan... not so much. Can't say I'm surprised.
Captain Monglobster
Registered User
- Nov 9, 2005
- 1,789
- 1,645
Lundmark was turning into at least a solid NHL player when Peca knee-on-knee'd him. I remember that as the end for Jamie.
eco's bones
Registered User
Neil Smith did not build the Rangers into a Stanley Cup contender in a vacuum. He had support along the way within the Gulf and Western apparatus--one in particular was Bob Gutkowski (who was kind of a Mr. Fixit as far as getting opposed sides to compromise and more or less get on the same path) who was in the process of being dumped as the Rangers were about to finally win that cup. Cablevision moved in and much of the old guard moved out--they weren't wanted. Cablevision with a more toe the line or else mentality regarding its employees--remember Bob Page. It's never quite been the same since. It took a couple years though before James Dolan really became the guy leading the dog and pony show but generally the support Smith had before Cablevision had all but evaporated by that time and the emphasis was on buying a winner through free agency and not developing one through prospects/draft. I had the distinct idea at the time that Smith was pressured and not very happy with that. Smith started out as an amateur scout and was known to be astute judge of young talent. He'd been very successful in that capacity and had his worked his way up--starting out on the Island and then with the Red Wings.
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
Still surprised Smith never ended up GMing anywhere else, except for the brief stint with the Isles.
Recent interview on EDM radio. Lots of good info on the upcoming season, including Stepan contract, Staal update, view on Richards, Boyle, Tortorella, old system vs new system, salary cap plans for the next two seasons, Rangers team building events, Richards golf game....
https://s3.amazonaws.com/the-jason-gregor-show-website/2013+August/Glen+Sather+-+August+22.mp3
https://s3.amazonaws.com/the-jason-gregor-show-website/2013+August/Glen+Sather+-+August+22.mp3
Boruto
.
- Jun 27, 2011
- 15,627
- 436
My pleasure. Sather sounds like he sees this team ready to take things to the next level.
The organization thought was the case last year too. Until they hit the ice and play real games, no one knows.
Nice interview. Very rare Sather speaks about anything Ranger related. I guess they really need some support for this Calagry golf tournie cause Sather was pushing it hard.
Users who are viewing this thread
Latest posts
-
-
HF Habs: Trade Proposal Thread #93: Y'all got any more of those 2nd line centers out there? (105 Viewers)- Latest: vokiel
-
-
