HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   New York Rangers (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=24)
-   -   Retire Brad Park's #? (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1598161)

Section32 02-04-2014 01:31 PM

Retire Brad Park's #?
 
Did Park play long enough 7 1/2 years to have his number retired?

I think his play on the ice certainly stands for itself.

If not, who would be next?

Giacomin 02-04-2014 01:40 PM

A very good Rangers player but he falls a bit short as a Ranger to have his number retired.

The Gloaming 02-04-2014 01:43 PM

If we're talking Rangers who deserve to have their numbers retired, first on line for me would be Bill Cook and Frank Boucher.

Brooklyn Ranger 02-04-2014 02:06 PM

No for Park--played more years as an opponent than as a Ranger.

At this point, I don't think any more players should have their numbers retired at this time. While players like Cook and Boucher are deserving, since they are not around anymore to enjoy the experience (and the vast majority of fans who saw or heard about their play from people who did see them play aren't around either), I would be opposed to retiring their numbers as well.

Crease 02-04-2014 02:09 PM

It's a weird situation. On the one hand, he played more games with another franchise and never won a Cup here. On the other hand, Orr single-handedly cost him 4 Norrises as a Ranger.

I agree that Bill Cook, Frank Boucher are bigger omissions. Arguably Ching Johnson too.

Matt4776 02-04-2014 02:09 PM

I hope the next number we retire is Hank's.

NYRFANMANI 02-04-2014 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brooklyn Ranger (Post 79361241)
No for Park--played more years as an opponent than as a Ranger.

This is my opinion also.

Megustaelhockey 02-04-2014 02:12 PM

Frank Boucher all day every day...

Crease 02-04-2014 02:15 PM

I still a little uneasy about Graves' #9. Especially before Bathgate. They should have just named a community-service award after him.

rkhum 02-04-2014 02:41 PM

Brad's number should have been retired because he never should have been traded but really, I am surprised all of you failed to mention Jean Ratelle.

He absolutely deserves it retired.

Hunter Gathers 02-04-2014 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jax1166 (Post 79363195)
Brad's number should have been retired because he never should have been traded but really, I am surprised all of you failed to mention Jean Ratelle.

He absolutely deserves it retired.

He's below the list after Cook, Boucher, and Park.

Let Blaine Die 02-04-2014 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jonathan. (Post 79363315)
He's below the list after Cook, Boucher, and Park.

Considering the years he spent here and the numbers he put up he deserves it just as much as those 3. Not below them.

PMII 02-04-2014 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crease (Post 79361767)
I still a little uneasy about Graves' #9. Especially before Bathgate. They should have just named a community-service award after him.

Eh, regarding Graves, if you're talking about his contributions on the ice (great player, but never elite outside of his 50 goal season), then yeah, but IMO what he has contributed off the ice more than earned him a banner raising, especially since he was a damn good player, too.

ReubenNYC 02-04-2014 03:38 PM

Sentimentality aside, and all due respect to his qualities as a person, Graves has no business having his number retired. Like someone else suggested, name a trophy for him if you want. But the #9 banner should be Bathgate's alone.

The only number that I think needs to get up there right now is Jean Ratelle's #19. Hall of Famer. 6th most games as a Ranger, 2nd in goals, 3rd in assists and points. Ahead of Bathgate, Messier and Graves (all of whom have retired numbers) on all four counts. Personally, I think it's disgraceful that he's not up there.

After #19, we can close the books for a while. Maybe Henrik someday, if he earns every penny on this new contract. But nobody else.

Crease 02-04-2014 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ReubenNYC (Post 79366979)
Sentimentality aside, and all due respect to his qualities as a person, Graves has no business having his number retired. Like someone else suggested, name a trophy for him if you want. But the #9 banner should be Bathgate's alone.

The only number that I think needs to get up there right now is Jean Ratelle's #19. Hall of Famer. 6th most games as a Ranger, 2nd in goals, 3rd in assists and points. Ahead of Bathgate, Messier and Graves (all of whom have retired numbers) on all four counts. Personally, I think it's disgraceful that he's not up there.

After #19, we can close the books for a while. Maybe Henrik someday, if he earns every penny on this new contract. But nobody else.

Nice first post. Lurker for a while?

Hunter Gathers 02-04-2014 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt Carle Place (Post 79366889)
Considering the years he spent here and the numbers he put up he deserves it just as much as those 3. Not below them.

Not a chance. Maybe you could say more than Park. Not more than Boucher or Cook.

Kane One 02-04-2014 04:04 PM

The Rangers are pathetic with retiring numbers.

Ratelleitlikeitis 02-04-2014 04:08 PM

It bothers me that Ratelle and Park are both quality players who because of a bad trade in my view deprives them of having a retired or honoured number ceremony. If both had stayed Rangers they may have been the best at their positions in our history, again in my view. Parks trade mid career fragmented the way he is considered, but he was great for both franchises.
Ratelle was excellent here for a long time, then continued to be a prime contributor in Boston. A classy player who deserves that recognition and he is still here to be recognized. Should be accomplished.

Bleed Ranger Blue 02-04-2014 04:09 PM

Nobody should be next. Lundqvist likely will be.

They already reached with the Graves retirement, and retiring Howell/Bathgate's #'s 50 friggin years after their careers ended. Like so many other things, this regime is turning the jersey retirement into a marketing ploy.

Flavius 02-04-2014 04:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crease (Post 79361413)
It's a weird situation. On the one hand, he played more games with another franchise and never won a Cup here. On the other hand, Orr single-handedly cost him 4 Norrises as a Ranger.

I agree that Bill Cook, Frank Boucher are bigger omissions. Arguably Ching Johnson too.

They needed to get on pace to retire the entire 1994 team! Come on!

Crease 02-04-2014 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flavius (Post 79369791)
They needed to get on pace to retire the entire 1994 team! Come on!

Thats really what it felt like.

Mr Atoz* 02-04-2014 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kane One (Post 79368765)
The Rangers are pathetic with retiring numbers.


Meaning that hey should retire every number between 1 and 30 so there are none left?

bernmeister 02-04-2014 06:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ratelleitlikeitis (Post 79368961)
It bothers me that Ratelle and Park are both quality players who because of a bad trade in my view deprives them of having a retired or honoured number ceremony. If both had stayed Rangers they may have been the best at their positions in our history, again in my view. Parks trade mid career fragmented the way he is considered, but he was great for both franchises.
Ratelle was excellent here for a long time, then continued to be a prime contributor in Boston. A classy player who deserves that recognition and he is still here to be recognized. Should be accomplished.

This, verbatim.
Park should have been recognized for his # simultaneously w/Leetch.

Ratelleitlikeitis 02-04-2014 06:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Atoz (Post 79376097)
Meaning that hey should retire every number between 1 and 30 so there are none left?

No, just the ones who deserve it like our third leading all time scorer who centred our all time leading scorer and could have been our leading scorer had he not been traded. How many franchises haven't retired their third leading all time scorer I wonder?
Bruins Espo, Habs Pocket Rocket, Hawks Denis Savard, Wings Delvecchio. The only one of the O6 not retired their third leading scorer are the Leafs with Dave Keon, due to a falling out I believe. If you argue the difference is Cups look at our guys honoured who have or haven't won cups.
Still think Ratelle is the obvious honouree.

Mr Atoz* 02-04-2014 06:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ratelleitlikeitis (Post 79377691)
No just the ones who deserve it like our third leading all time scorer who centred our all time leading scorer and could have been our leading scorer had he not been traded. How many franchises haven't retired their third leading all time scorer I wonder?


I would guess most of them.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:13 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.