What is your most unpopular Rangers opinion?

  • 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
Yeah it's not about cup or bust. It's about the Rangers aren't fun.

I've spent nearly my entire adulthood watching them play bend-but-don't-break hockey where the other team dictates play most nights. And the organization evidently doesn't see this as an issue.

What's even more interesting is it's been several years and you still can't seem to grasp its mostly a personnel issue.
 
Fitting that I somehow chose to answer this quickly (after the most adamant Staal hater, before Rangers/Wings game.

My answer is......that Marc Staal ISN'T the NHL's worst dman.
 
Okay, 4 good years (2 great) in a sea of ~20 while having the best goaltender of this generation and having practically unlimited budget in the cap and no-cap era. I stand corrected.

I'm not a championship or bust person. I can enjoy sports for what they are. The Rangers as an organization has created very few lasting memories for me and most of them are concentrated in a four year window. I expect more.

I could definitely see this take but for us who experienced ‘94, IMHO we kind of forgave the organization for ‘97-‘04 and then view ‘06-‘17 as a separate period with which I’m pretty satisfied overall. I’d give them a solid B+ given trips to SCF and ECF. Having Lundqvist during this time earns even a special asterisk.
 
Maybe - a lot of things would've had to go right to keep that potential core together. Also, Kovalev was a top 5 integral part to that cup IMO. Who knows what would've happened without him.
Well this is an unpopular opinion thread which leads to boundless speculation. I personally love the what if debates. It's part of the allure of sports!
Do you mind expanding on this point? How do they specifically ensure the Rangers play less games?
I think that amonte and weight were better than Noonan and Matteau that year and that if they had been in those lineups, the rangers would have scored more and not needed the matteau miracles. Amonte was really really good. It is pure speculation, but I didnt like the trades at the time and I still dont to this day and I genuinely believe the team was better with them than without them.
 
Marc Staal received a 6 year contract extension after his major injuries in which he could never be the same player. Endorsing such a ridiculous contract justifies you questioning others being Human? Please lol
No, I didnt endorse it......nor even support it at the time. Yes, his contract has hurt this team in many ways......I just basically refuse to beat up on a player that really was a big part of the heart and soul of this team for many years. With that said, I wish he......along with Hank would just step aside and retire already.
 
No, I didnt endorse it......nor even support it at the time. Yes, his contract has hurt this team in many ways......I just basically refuse to beat up on a player that really was a big part of the heart and soul of this team for many years. With that said, I wish he......along with Hank would just step aside and retire already.

Can’t have it both ways IMO.
 
Some Rangers ones and some more general ones that apply to the Rangers.

Having a highly paid, top goalie is synonymous with mediocrity in the modern cap era. Money is much better spent elsewhere.

Most NHL teams would be better off playing with 10/11 forwards, and no 4th line.

It's fine because it's his rookie season, but Adam Fox's defensive play is mediocre and extremely overrated here.

Kreider's speed strength and net-front play is his strength, and will let him age nicely. His speed contributes very little because he rarely produces as a result of it.

A goalie who can handle the puck can (and hopefully will for us) make a big difference in how much time a team spends in their own zone.

NHL refs are pretty alright.
 
Some Rangers ones and some more general ones that apply to the Rangers.

Having a highly paid, top goalie is synonymous with mediocrity in the modern cap era. Money is much better spent elsewhere.

Most NHL teams would be better off playing with 10/11 forwards, and no 4th line.

A goalie who can handle the puck can (and hopefully will for us) make a big difference in how much time a team spends in their own zone.

These x10000

Can't even imagine how much unnecessary defending the Rangers have done because Hank thought he was helping by coughing up the puck to an attacker when he stopped it.
 
plugging 4th line goons into our lineup did nothing but hinder our success in the late 00s, and I would bet we would have won a championship, if not for wasting roster spots on guys who shouldn't be playing.

probably not unpopular but. yeah.
 
Because it "sucked", or because every team makes bad choices?
Think we just choose to focus on what we "could have had".
Partly us focusing on what we could have had, partly on him not developing the way he could have and partly on the game changing. If the game today was similar to 2010 or earlier and McIlrath became a true skates well for his size guy, he would be an effective player. I think the beast that Tarasenko became really colors the pick, but he was passed on by a lot of teams. Was anyone crying when the Rangers drafted Cherepanov instead of a plug at 17 overall?
 
Quinn is in over his head.

He's lucky Panarin has been other-worldly.

He has caused Buch to regress, and has made Kakko invisible.

Then again, he was the sacrificial lamb brought in to coach a team that tanked and once we are ready to contend he'll be jettisoned in favor of an NHL coach with a winning pedigree.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BroadwayStorm
Partly us focusing on what we could have had, partly on him not developing the way he could have and partly on the game changing. If the game today was similar to 2010 or earlier and McIlrath became a true skates well for his size guy, he would be an effective player. I think the beast that Tarasenko became really colors the pick, but he was passed on by a lot of teams. Was anyone crying when the Rangers drafted Cherepanov instead of a plug at 17 overall?

Popular opinion at the time of the pick: We don't need Fowler, we already have Del Zotto.
 
Some Rangers ones and some more general ones that apply to the Rangers.

Having a highly paid, top goalie is synonymous with mediocrity in the modern cap era. Money is much better spent elsewhere.

Most NHL teams would be better off playing with 10/11 forwards, and no 4th line.

It's fine because it's his rookie season, but Adam Fox's defensive play is mediocre and extremely overrated here.

Kreider's speed strength and net-front play is his strength, and will let him age nicely. His speed contributes very little because he rarely produces as a result of it.

A goalie who can handle the puck can (and hopefully will for us) make a big difference in how much time a team spends in their own zone.

NHL refs are pretty alright.

What should the Rangers have done with Lundqvist as he was approaching UFA with the team in the midst of its peak we had been building for for 5+years? Just one year after making an absolute must win now move in trading for Nash, two years removed from signing Richards. Trading Lundqvist would have been counter productive to all those moves.

Seems as if they were at his mercy and had no choice but to give him that contract. I guess you're insinuating Lundqvist was actually an unlucky curse to this franchise.
 
Last edited:

Ad

Ad