Second impressions of Marty St. Louis (Mod warning in OP)

[jerseyjinx94]

I don't understand how you can say these two statements:

1 - Win the Cup or the trade is a failure.

2 - So if MSL does nothing, and we win, how can you say the trade was good?


So in your mind, MSL has to score 1,000 points in one season and we win the Cup or the trade is a failure. What is your standard? If we win the Cup and he does nothing, are you upset about losing the draft picks?

The point I'm making is your barometer (True Blue) of what makes this good trade is so inconsistent that I don't understand what will satisfy you at this point. I don't think there is anything that will make you like the trade, even if MSL wins a Conn Smythe. You'll still say we gave up too much.

 

[haveandare]

I thought he played well last night except for not scoring. Again, yeah that's a huge "except" for this player. But he had some nice takeaways, made some slick passes, didn't seem to hurt the team at any point. The only time that I found myself really frustrated with him was on that last PP when everyone was trying to set him up. Obviously, everyone is going out of their way to get him shooting chances, and he just kept passing. Rip it. It's not going to get easier than a PP against the Oilers. At this point, throw pride out the window and do what you have to do to get that first goal.

 

[Jersey Girl]

This has potential to be one of the worst Rangers trades in quite a while.

 

[beef 4 lunch]

This has potential to be one of the worst Rangers trades in quite a while.

hahaha. Please explain.

 

[Jersey Girl]

hahaha. Please explain.

Based on what we gave up and what we received. Could wind up being a disaster.

 

[AlternateSideParking]

They are not mutually exclusive.

If he was 6-10-16 in his 13 games he would make the team better, thus improving the chances to get to the SCF.

I hated the trade, but you never let picks get in the way of a chance to win a Cup. The problem is that they never win a Cup.

Who was complaining about Weight and Amonte on June 16th, 1994?

I'll go on record now stating that I could care less about two 1st rounders if they are playing in the CF in two months.

 

[Jersey Girl]

If he was 6-10-16 in his 13 games he would make the team better, thus improving the chances to get to the SCF.

I hated the trade, but you never let picks get in the way of a chance to win a Cup. The problem is that they never win a Cup.

Who was complaining about Weight and Amonte on June 16th, 1994?

I'll go on record now stating that I could care less about two 1st rounders if they are playing in the CF in two months.

That's what I've been saying all along. Good teams make trades like this when they are that player away from winning a Stanley Cup. I don't feel like St Louis is the final piece for the Rangers to win the Stanley Cup. I just don't.

And I said that at the time of the trade, BEFORE St Louis got off to his three points in his 14 games (not 13 games) start.

 

[AlternateSideParking]

That's what I've been saying all along. Good teams make trades like this when they are that player away from winning a Stanley Cup. I don't feel like St Louis is the final piece for the Rangers to win the Stanley Cup. I just don't.

And I said that at the time of the trade, BEFORE St Louis got off to his three points in his 14 games (not 13 games) start.

He's definitely not the final piece. At least not know. A lot of people felt the team would be good enough to maybe win two rounds with Callahan.

It could turn into a nightmare scenario. Callahan was supposed to bring back assets, not cost additional ones.

Now, you can have a scenario where MSL stinks (check), Callahan doesn't sign with TB, and the Rangers lose in the 1st or 2nd round without a 1st rounder in the strongest draft in years.

It's going to be an ugly offseason if it plays out that way.

 

[mandiblesofdoom]

If he was 6-10-16 in his 13 games he would make the team better, thus improving the chances to get to the SCF.

That would improve our chances from 3% to 5%. Still very unlikely we get to the finals with Boston, a clearly better team, in the way. And we would have to get through two other series just to meet Boston.

I hated the trade, but you never let picks get in the way of a chance to win a Cup. The problem is that they never win a Cup.

If this trade was about "winning a cup," Sather is a dope. The odds are very small we win a cup, with or without St. Louis.

Who was complaining about Weight and Amonte on June 16th, 1994?

Comparing the 1994 team to this one is unsound. That team was loaded. All those trades were justifiable by "it helps us win now," because the 1994 team was actually good enough to win. No other team in the league was clearly better.

This team isn't in the same category. It's unlikely Martin St. Louis gets us to the promised land. Boston and St. Louis (blues) are better than the Rangers.

Essentially we gave up draft picks for whatever excitement MSL generates in the early rounds.

 

[Idlerlee]

the Great St Louis is producing less frequently than Diaz and Boyle atm. What do we do if he still doesnt magically fire on all cylinders in the playoffs ?

If he doesnt deliver in the PO's at the very least, this trade is officially one huge mess. Compared to the big one it already is

 

[robwrx04]

Per Steve Zipay via Twitter:


Torts on press comparing records with AV: "We're losing games, I'm the idiot, he's the smart guy. I should be scrutinized...

Torts: "I get it. that's part of the business. I've always had a great deal of respect for Alain.."

Torts on St. Louis' struggles: "We've texted...when it comes down to the real deal, he's going to be a good player for you guys."

Torts on Cally: "He was my captain. Saw him when we were in Tampa. The uniform didn't look right....but they (NYR) have found their way"

 

[True Blue]

I'm just trying to understand. Are you mainly upset about the picks going the other way?

What would you have done differently?

My main point of contention is the giving away of draft picks.

What would I have done differently? Not given away the picks. Would Yzerman have still traded MSL? Maybe not. But I doubt it. MSL had them over a barrel and was demanding a trade. He had the leverage.

At any rate, yes it is the giving away of draft picks that mainly bothers me. This is not a win-NOW team and this was a win-NOW trade. The organization cannot afford to give the draft picks away. Which is why to me, short of a Cup, this trade is a failure.

 

[Pizza]

I would not have sacrificed a first and a second on Martin St Louis. I said it the day of the trade, and I'm saying it now.

Kept Cally as a rental, traded him for picks/prospects...depends what was available to Sather, which none of us are privy to. But not trading a first and a second along with Cally. No.

I'm extremely reluctant to make deals that send home grown, younger players and picks the other way in deals.

That said if I had to make a choice between the deals that brought us Nash and MSL, I'd take the MSL trade.

Why? Cup winner. Proven leader. Amazing work ethic.

I have to believe this temporary. You don't do what this guy has done year after year and then suddenly lose everything. This is not Scott Gomez, Bobby Holik or even Chris Drury we are talking about here.

At least I hope not. We'll see.

 

[True Blue]

I don't understand how you can say these two statements:

1 - Win the Cup or the trade is a failure.

2 - So if MSL does nothing, and we win, how can you say the trade was good?


So in your mind, MSL has to score 1,000 points in one season and we win the Cup or the trade is a failure. What is your standard? If we win the Cup and he does nothing, are you upset about losing the draft picks?

The point I'm making is your barometer (True Blue) of what makes this good trade is so inconsistent that I don't understand what will satisfy you at this point. I don't think there is anything that will make you like the trade, even if MSL wins a Conn Smythe. You'll still say we gave up too much.

If we win the Cup and MSL does nothing that will not make the trade a good deal. However, I will not complain since the win NOW trade happened in the win NOW window.

There is nothing inconsistent about my barometer. TO me, this trade is only successful if the Cup is brought here.

 

[True Blue]

hahaha. Please explain.

This has been covered ad nauseum, no?

You may choose to think differently, but those that are against the trade have been pretty clear as to the reasons why.

 

[Thirty One]

If we win the Cup and MSL does nothing that will not make the trade a good deal. However, I will not complain since the win NOW trade happened in the win NOW window.

There is nothing inconsistent about my barometer. TO me, this trade is only successful if the Cup is brought here.

If the Rangers win the Cup will you consider them a win-now team?

 

[Son of Steinbrenner]

If the Rangers win the Cup will you consider them a win-now team?

While I can't speak for TB, I can assume by his posts that the answer to that question would be, of course he wouldn't consider the team a win-now team.

If the Rangers win the Cup with St. Louis as soon as the games is over THAT cup would have nothing to do with the Rangers future going forward.

 

[True Blue]

If this trade was about "winning a cup," Sather is a dope. The odds are very small we win a cup, with or without St. Louis.

Sort of the point

 

[True Blue]

While I can't speak for TB, I can assume by his posts that the answer to that question would be, of course he wouldn't consider the team a win-now team.

I will answer your question this way. I do not think that the Rangers were a "one player away" team. And this trade has made this a win NOW team. So yes, this is a win NOW team.

 

[Pizza]

My main point of contention is the giving away of draft picks.

What would I have done differently? Not given away the picks. Would Yzerman have still traded MSL? Maybe not. But I doubt it. MSL had them over a barrel and was demanding a trade. He had the leverage.

At any rate, yes it is the giving away of draft picks that mainly bothers me. This is not a win-NOW team and this was a win-NOW trade. The organization cannot afford to give the draft picks away. Which is why to me, short of a Cup, this trade is a failure.

OK. Fair enough. Thanks for answering my question.

I hated giving away the picks as well....and if it were any number of other "Stars" would have been even more pissed.

To me MSL falls into that select category of special players. Of course he comes to MSG and is immediately anything but. I think he will figure it out. Though I doubt he's ever been thru a skid like this one.

The guy screams credible to me. Legit. So, if he really just craters... then we really do know, once and for all....that things truly are different here.

 

[StepansLabyrinth]

Imagine how funny this board would be if the Rangers won the Stanley Cup and MSL had 0 points in the playoffs.

 

[doncherrysgrill]

He's still too skilled to suck long term. He's Marty freekin St Louis for crying out loud.

I still do the same deal again no problem maybe with 1 less high pick but bottom like msl is way more player than cally.

The illogical mindset of Rangers fans who don't see a reason to question Sather. Jeeze. If we made the trade for Jagr are you going to sit here and say that guy's also worth moving heaven and earth for? It's a name who has big point numbers though guys, it'll be okay!

A scout in the Edmonton organization said that he would trade all of his 2014 picks for a single 2015 pick. TSN's Guy Flaming reported that a few weeks ago. I don't know if too many hockey fans, even those who post on boards like this and are knowledgeable about their teams are really understanding how big this 2015 draft has the potential to be.

hahaha. Please explain.

You trade away a player who is 100% the heart and soul of the team, something that's important during the playoffs, for a guy who is aging and doesn't really have the talent that you thought he might. You also trade away a first round pick in the most important draft since 2003 and potentially a first round pick in 2014. Also, since this club is now in "win-now" mentality, I think it's not out of the question to imagine a situation where Sather keeps Richards around hoping that his relationship with St. Louis can lead to something "special". There is the potential for a situation where not only do the Rangers win a cup with MSL, but they also lose a B prospect (this year), an A prospect (next year), are stuck with Brad Richards' horrific contract, and don't have the money to retain the players who are now your "core" (if this team even has that anymore) down the line. This is something that could set the team back 10 years.

Please stop discussing scenarios in which the Rangers win the cup and ________. It's not happening. Even if the Rangers were good enough to beat the Bruins (they're not) they have NO SHOT of competing with any of the top teams in the Western Conference. The Rangers are, at best, the third best team in a bad conference. There are six teams in the West that are clearly better than the Rangers. It's a fantasy scenario.

 

[rpm3311]

bench him, show him he needs to step up or we will have one of our kids from the AHL take his spot. We'll most likely get the same results from them

 

[Cake or Death]

The illogical mindset of Rangers fans who don't see a reason to question Sather. Jeeze. If we made the trade for Jagr are you going to sit here and say that guy's also worth moving heaven and earth for? It's a name who has big point numbers though guys, it'll be okay!

Every single person here, bar none, questions Sather season after season after season. Comparing Jagr and St. Louis is a bit ludicrous. In the three seasons leading into this one, Jagr is .75 PPG regular season and .55 PPG playoffs. St. Louis is 1.13 PPG regular season and 1.11 PPG playoffs. In addition, Jagr finishes 53rd in Lady Byng voting, while St. Luois is 2nd All Star Team twice; Lady Byng winner twice, third season 5th; Hart finalist (3rd), another season finishes 9th; Art Ross winner; 19th in Selke voting. If trading for these two, these players are not comparable at all.

A scout in the Edmonton organization said that he would trade all of his 2014 picks for a single 2015 pick. TSN's Guy Flaming reported that a few weeks ago. I don't know if too many hockey fans, even those who post on boards like this and are knowledgeable about their teams are really understanding how big this 2015 draft has the potential to be.

You do not see the humor/red flag in the bolded item? It's hard to knock their prestigious scouting; they are, after all, ahead of Buffalo this season.

You trade away a player who is 100% the heart and soul of the team, something that's important during the playoffs, for a guy who is aging and doesn't really have the talent that you thought he might. You also trade away a first round pick in the most important draft since 2003 and potentially a first round pick in 2014. Also, since this club is now in "win-now" mentality, I think it's not out of the question to imagine a situation where Sather keeps Richards around hoping that his relationship with St. Louis can lead to something "special". There is the potential for a situation where not only do the Rangers win a cup with MSL, but they also lose a B prospect (this year), an A prospect (next year), are stuck with Brad Richards' horrific contract, and don't have the money to retain the players who are now your "core" (if this team even has that anymore) down the line. This is something that could set the team back 10 years.

Callahan is not the 100 percent heart and soul of the team, he wasn't even the most important or impactful player at his position. Fact is, the team hasn't missed a beat since the trade and is doing fine. Losing the picks, while not ideal, did not cost us a grade A or grade B prospect. What they cost us remains to be seen, but reality (i.e. factual stats) indicate it was a low-risk maneuver as late round one picks rarely amount to anything. Would I prefer to have the picks regardless? Absolutely. More picks means more chances of finding gems in the rough. But to say they'd set us back 10 years is folly as we currently have a very young team and the team's positions are well covered. On D: Moore (23), McDonagh (24), Falk (25), Staal (27), Stralman (27), Diaz (28), Klein, Girardi (29). Centers: Miller (21), Stepan (23), Brassard (26), Boyle (29), Moore, Richards (33). Forwards: Kreider (22), Hagelin (25), Zuccarello (26), Dorsett, Pouliot (27), Carcillo, Nash (29), St Louis (38). It's a very young team, and there is no need to hit panic buttons.

Please stop discussing scenarios in which the Rangers win the cup and ________. It's not happening. Even if the Rangers were good enough to beat the Bruins (they're not) they have NO SHOT of competing with any of the top teams in the Western Conference. The Rangers are, at best, the third best team in a bad conference. There are six teams in the West that are clearly better than the Rangers. It's a fantasy scenario.

I don't think anyone realistically expects this team to win the Cup. While I don't disagree with you, I think you could have also deemed it a bit of a fantasy scenario when teams like NJ and Philly made it to the finals the past few seasons, so anything is possible. At the very least, with the way the playoffs are formatted now, we have a much better chance of getting anywhere if we don't have to look at Boston till round three at the earliest. And if Boston gets upset in the prior two rounds, it is absolutely realistic to say the east is fairly up for grabs.

 

[blue2noise]

hahaha. Please explain.

I'll explain. Sather had a coveted rental for the first time in a very long time, and somehow he is one of the few GMs in history to not only use it to get older and smaller, but to somehow lose picks as well.