Gardner McKay
RIP, Jimmy.
Who said they are not real fans? Or are you falsely implying that is what we are saying. Now I am just confused.
-
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
Who said they are not real fans? Or are you falsely implying that is what we are saying. Now I am just confused.
I'd be willing to offer insightful arguments if you:
1) Did not put words in my mouth
2) Did not skew what I'm saying
3) Did not take what i'm saying out of proportion
You claim my generalizations are unacceptable under the basis that they're... generalizations... and then you go on and make them yourself:
"Movement for the sake of movement. No one wants to see that, they have reason for wanting to see the change, justified or not."
Furthermore, you're speaking on behalf of many on here and not on what they post but rather their intent of the post. There is absolutely no way you know that for anyone beside yourself. I'm claiming that due to sheer amount of trade proposals day in and day out, that some-many of our fans have the inherent need to see change. That's action. Going on a board and posting your desires as to what you want/see fit is an action. Telling me that the action means otherwise is the assumption that YOU are making, not I.
It's easy to sit here and say "I don't want change, I want the team to succeed" and then make 25 trade proposals over the following 2 months. What's contradictory there? My statement to my action. And... actions are usually A LOT more indicative of sentiment and intent than words.
"So, what you are suggesting is this, people join the board, put up the facade of being a fan of a team, and then start clamoring for roster movement to feed some odd desire they have to get high off 'change', or trades?"
Never said anything of that nature.
Additionally, I never claimed anyone wasn't a real fan. The accusations that a fan "needs to see change on a team" comes from *given fan's" constant trade proposals. Again, I value actions over words.
HFsNumber1Heel
FKA Roo Returns...Still A Contrarian Apparently
As far as Cammaleri goes....not a good fit here. It would cost too much. Maybe for a third and like Bickel, but I wouldn't give anything of value up for him. He's a decent player but his high scoring days are over.
The Blue Jackets aren't a good trading partner. Tired of poaching their system, and there's nothing they could give back to the Rangers that would really stand out. I liked Marco Danko but I don't know if the Rangers do. His stats are pretty low but a young player in the KHL, stats don't really tell the story as many of them get limited icetime.
Someone like a Stempniak would interest me.
The Blue Jackets aren't a good trading partner. Tired of poaching their system, and there's nothing they could give back to the Rangers that would really stand out. I liked Marco Danko but I don't know if the Rangers do. His stats are pretty low but a young player in the KHL, stats don't really tell the story as many of them get limited icetime.
Someone like a Stempniak would interest me.
Gardner McKay
RIP, Jimmy.
In your opinion it doesn't make it correct. Do you think I care? Honestly, why do you care so much if somebody doesn't see something the way you do?
It's funny, you respond to this post but you won't respond to my post last night, that I went line by line explaining my position.
You know it doesn't matter what we post here. The Rangers don't care what our opinion is. If somebody doesn't agree with your opinion it doesn't make that person wrong.
Lets just agree to disagree. I think the truth is somewhere in the middle. I do genuinely believe that some posters like transactions more than the on ice produce. I'm not going to risk getting banned by pulling up posts out of context and saying "Here is my proof"
It's not an off-the-wall statement. Other people see it and on a fluid message board that should be enough for you. For you to demand proof is ridiculous. Especially when the proof is here in this thread.
E-Train
Registered User
I'd take Jenner, Prout and their 2nd. Like what I've seen out of Jenner this year. Thought Prout played well last year, haven't seen much of him this season. Great value from a 6th rounder. Would want the 1st but the 2nd is probably more realistic.
Gardner McKay
RIP, Jimmy.
I don't know much about Prout or Jenner. I see what others are saying about Atkinson though. Having another skater that small would not be ideal.
You write well. Don't excuse yourself.
I respect your opinion. I've been coming on this board for years now and to be honest, sometimes, you'd like to see a little more happiness and positivity than you see on here.
Maybe I come across as policiing, in which case, I'll have to apologize at some point or another for overstepping my boundaries.
At some point, it becomes unbearable to watch complaints for complaint sake.
If you're asking for consideration from others to stop "policing" it's definitely more than fair to ask back for consideration on the content we read on here. That's how it should work. It's frustrating and sometimes disheartening reading some of the things on here.
I respect your opinion and respect that you addressed it the way you did.
Atkinson has a great connection with CK. It was definitely fun, to say the least, watching their line consistently.
eco's bones
Registered User
Probably true that we don't deal with Columbus but the suggestion that the Blue Jackets don't have anything worthwhile for Callahan is what prompted me to list numerous options including Atkinson. He has very good hands--he can finish and he is young. He could also fit into our lineup right away. True though that it would make the Rangers an even smaller team going into the playoffs.
http://www.ottawasun.com/2014/02/08...tewart?token=73a669809e6fe791659b92ea1d416f1b
Stewart had that one good year in Colorado. 28 goals in 09-10 in 77 games. He had 28 goals in 10-11 in 62 games which was the year he was traded. He had 18 goals in the lockout year. 30 goal pro-rated season. He has 15 goals this season. 22 goal pace. I read Stewart isn't a good fit in St.Louis playing for Hitch. He would be a better fit playing for Vigneault. How much of a home run is Stewart looking to hit? It can't be 7 years and close to $7M per. Stewart has the size the Rangers need on the wing.
E-Train
Registered User
Jenner has decent size, good player in the games I've seen. Already putting up some points as a 20 year old. Prout to me, seems positionally sound, is big and can fight. Not much offense. He's what you hope Sam Noreau can be become, 3rd pair, tough, RHD.
if the next deal with the Jackets, i can see Atkinson coming to NYR with his connection with CK.. Sather likes to get players that are familiar with each other... call up JT Miller or Lindberg..
Cam Atkinson Boone Jenner Michael Chaput and 2ed in 2014 to Rangers for Callahan and Boyle..
Chaput was a flyers 3rd round draft pick in 2010.
and was traded on 2011/02/28 Columbus Blue Jackets traded Tom Sestito to the Philadelphia Flyers for Greg Moore And Michael Chaput.
http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=115903
Flyers were stupid to trade him for a goon like Sestito.. just like that Sharp trade to the Hawks
Brooklyn Rangers Fan
Change is good.
The holier than thou stuff about trades for trades' sake is pretty irritating and is a stance that I primarily see coming from folks who have in other posts shown personal investment in the players currently under discussion. For understandable reasons, it's a situation that is exacerbated when the players under discussion are "home grown," blue collar types who have been on the team for a while.
I have followed this team since the early-mid 80s. I saw the nearly magical run behind Beezer in '85-'86, Trader Phil chasing stars on the downsides of their careers, the Carpenter trade, the near misses in the early 90s, the subsequent roster turnover, the championship in 93-94, the disastrous moves that followed, the Messier saga parts I & II, the old folks home he brought with him on his return, then the country club after that, the Leetch trade and the "rebuild," the Jagr years, the changing of the culture post-lockout, the UFA albatrosses - and everything else that has brought us to today.
That is what forms my perspective. I am an indisputable die-hard fan of this team. And I want one thing: a team built to be a perpetual competitor for the Stanley Cup year-in and year-out.
My experience has taught me a number of things:
1) "anything can happen" is fool's gold;
2) deals made from that flawed perspective tend to be bad long term decisions;
3) true perpetual competitors are built around young, all-star talent;
4) that foundation generally needs to include a true, PPG or better 1C, and preferably an offensive-minded PMD;
5) UFAs or even trade acquisitions who are brought in when they are older than their mid-twenties are not a substitute for the young, all-star talent;
6) "intangibles" are also not a substitute;
7) sometimes one or more steps back are necessary/worth it to acquire those players;
8) you identify that talent and lock it up;
9) if you feel your team is lacking in intangibles, THAT is the piece you add to the foundation, not the other way 'round; and
10) any player who doesn't fit the mold is expendable, no matter the emotional attachment.
If you don't yet have the foundation of the perpetual competitor in place, then you need to be focused on getting there. All your decisions should be made with that goal in mind, even if they are multiple steps away, and any move that doesn't point in that direction is a distraction and holds you back.
I think this team has some fundamental elements - Hank in net, McD on defense and, potentially, if everything works out, Kreider as a top line PF. They also have some other very good elements just a level below - Nash as a scoring winger, Stepan as a 1/2 tweener 2-way C, Zucc as a playmaking winger and PP specialist, Callahan as a heart-and-soul 2-way winger, Staal and Girardi as shut-down D, and good depth all the way throughout the lineup, both on offense and on defense. But they are missing that true 1C and, ideally, that offensive-minded PMD.
Because I don’t think they’re there yet, I think they should be working to get there and anyone not listed in that first group of three is expendable in the right deal to move towards that goal. Which is why, yes, I have a long list of people who are available, and it includes everyone who is currently an UFA. Of course you don’t move all of them - but you should be looking to make several moves from among them to get the missing pieces.
Callahan is the most obvious. Unless he is willing to take a significant discount (which would be the exact opposite of indications), he’s worth more to us as a trade chip than he is on the roster. You simply don’t lock up 7-8% of your cap in your third best RW who is prone to breaking down, especially not when that is the strongest position in your organization.
Girardi also makes sense, because I don’t think he fits AV’s system that well and he would have enormous value on the market. However, he’d be harder to replace, 1st pair RDs are hard to find, he has proven to be more durable and his demands seem more reasonable, so it’s much more likely they re-sign him. Depending on the deal, I’d be in favor for the reasons above.
Of the remainder, it all depends on the market and what other moves you’ve made. For example, if you can get a first for Boyle you move him; if you’ve moved Boyle, you are much less likely to move Moore; and so on. But at the end of the day, any move that doesn’t sacrifice one of the fundamental pieces and that moves you (either directly or by acquiring an asset that could eventually get you there) towards the ultimate goal is worth discussing. THAT’S why I’m here and THAT’S why I’m willing to consider a whole host of alternatives. It has nothing to do with "change for change's sake."
I have followed this team since the early-mid 80s. I saw the nearly magical run behind Beezer in '85-'86, Trader Phil chasing stars on the downsides of their careers, the Carpenter trade, the near misses in the early 90s, the subsequent roster turnover, the championship in 93-94, the disastrous moves that followed, the Messier saga parts I & II, the old folks home he brought with him on his return, then the country club after that, the Leetch trade and the "rebuild," the Jagr years, the changing of the culture post-lockout, the UFA albatrosses - and everything else that has brought us to today.
That is what forms my perspective. I am an indisputable die-hard fan of this team. And I want one thing: a team built to be a perpetual competitor for the Stanley Cup year-in and year-out.
My experience has taught me a number of things:
1) "anything can happen" is fool's gold;
2) deals made from that flawed perspective tend to be bad long term decisions;
3) true perpetual competitors are built around young, all-star talent;
4) that foundation generally needs to include a true, PPG or better 1C, and preferably an offensive-minded PMD;
5) UFAs or even trade acquisitions who are brought in when they are older than their mid-twenties are not a substitute for the young, all-star talent;
6) "intangibles" are also not a substitute;
7) sometimes one or more steps back are necessary/worth it to acquire those players;
8) you identify that talent and lock it up;
9) if you feel your team is lacking in intangibles, THAT is the piece you add to the foundation, not the other way 'round; and
10) any player who doesn't fit the mold is expendable, no matter the emotional attachment.
If you don't yet have the foundation of the perpetual competitor in place, then you need to be focused on getting there. All your decisions should be made with that goal in mind, even if they are multiple steps away, and any move that doesn't point in that direction is a distraction and holds you back.
I think this team has some fundamental elements - Hank in net, McD on defense and, potentially, if everything works out, Kreider as a top line PF. They also have some other very good elements just a level below - Nash as a scoring winger, Stepan as a 1/2 tweener 2-way C, Zucc as a playmaking winger and PP specialist, Callahan as a heart-and-soul 2-way winger, Staal and Girardi as shut-down D, and good depth all the way throughout the lineup, both on offense and on defense. But they are missing that true 1C and, ideally, that offensive-minded PMD.
Because I don’t think they’re there yet, I think they should be working to get there and anyone not listed in that first group of three is expendable in the right deal to move towards that goal. Which is why, yes, I have a long list of people who are available, and it includes everyone who is currently an UFA. Of course you don’t move all of them - but you should be looking to make several moves from among them to get the missing pieces.
Callahan is the most obvious. Unless he is willing to take a significant discount (which would be the exact opposite of indications), he’s worth more to us as a trade chip than he is on the roster. You simply don’t lock up 7-8% of your cap in your third best RW who is prone to breaking down, especially not when that is the strongest position in your organization.
Girardi also makes sense, because I don’t think he fits AV’s system that well and he would have enormous value on the market. However, he’d be harder to replace, 1st pair RDs are hard to find, he has proven to be more durable and his demands seem more reasonable, so it’s much more likely they re-sign him. Depending on the deal, I’d be in favor for the reasons above.
Of the remainder, it all depends on the market and what other moves you’ve made. For example, if you can get a first for Boyle you move him; if you’ve moved Boyle, you are much less likely to move Moore; and so on. But at the end of the day, any move that doesn’t sacrifice one of the fundamental pieces and that moves you (either directly or by acquiring an asset that could eventually get you there) towards the ultimate goal is worth discussing. THAT’S why I’m here and THAT’S why I’m willing to consider a whole host of alternatives. It has nothing to do with "change for change's sake."
Last edited:
It kills me watching Dubi take it to us, he's got the makings of a Ranger killer.
I always say I'm gonna go to a ranger/jacket game and I can't bring myself too. I would not have made that trade, and hindsight just furthers my stance on it as time goes. Nash can a dominant force if he wants to be. I don't think he ever developed the drive that dominant players have. He could change that himself if he decided to.
I know it was properly a pipe dream, but I wanted the Rangers to make an offer to Stamkos and either swallow the picks or agree on comp. There was a period of time before he signed, where I got the feeling he wanted out.
Last edited:
with Colin Fraser on waivers, how would you guys feel if Rangers claimed him?? has 2 stanley cups and knows what it takes to win.. not much skill but good gritty player that can be used in the playoffs... is an agitator..
can score vs the Devils
can score vs the Devils
I have the feeling its inevitable that the rangers and columbus are meeting in the playoffs. Aside from the fact that they are the 2nd and 3rd best teams in the division, with the recent events and the two clubs so intertwined with each other now, and now in the same division. It's gotta go down like that.
No more trades with Columbus. Like some have said, they're not giving up what the rangers need/want.
HatTrick Swayze
Just Be Nice
Wow. Awesome post. Agree with 99% of every letter. This is what I would have expressed if I wasn't too lazy / hungover.
Bravo.
There were rumors a couple of weeks ago about Dubi being on the block. If its true I would do a Cally for Dubi deal plus trying to squeeze an additional middle draft pick.Dubi is signed for another year... he is exactly what we need a third liner with speed,size and not afraid to use it.
i thought Dubinsky was gonna be their next captain... i doubt they trade him. but anything is possible
Gardner McKay
RIP, Jimmy.
So what player am I personally invested in? To save you the trouble of looking, I am not. I can see both sides of the fence with Girardi and Callahan. My preference would be to trade Callahan and resign Girardi. The trade for the sake of trades has little to do with Callahan and Girardi.
I agree with the second bolded 100%. Although you and I may not be willing to, there are people who will move the fundamental pieces. That is where the arguments come from.
There you go with absolutes. There are definitely rangers fans like this. Who are you to try and tell ranger fans who have been fans for decades and decades, have talked to other ranger fans all their lives, have been talking ranger hockey for 15 years online with other fans, that there aren't rangers fans like this. We're notorious for being a fan base like that. All it was in the late 90s and early 00s was well this summer we'll bring in these 5 free agents, and we'll trade these guys, and we'll bring back these other guys. And that was before the rangers went into a rebuild and fans started falling in love with player development. The more you fight this argument, your gonna have fans come of the woodworks who don't post often, calling you out as wrong.
Brooklyn Rangers Fan
Change is good.
Apologies - I should know better than to speak in absolutes and to lump people into one category. I should have said "primarily". I hope it doesn't discount the rest of my post and my (as well as that of most other similar posters') willingness to debate all sorts of transactions without being a "trade muppet".
Gardner McKay
RIP, Jimmy.
I don't know why every post on here is dripping with sarcasm either. I just don't get it. Especially considering that I said I agree with you on a portion of your post.
Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,357
"I don't care what you think."
"Why didn't you respond to my post?!!!"
.....
- Status
