HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   New York Rangers (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=24)
-   -   What if Blackburn had not been hurt. (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=337332)

Pizza 01-28-2007 02:26 AM

What if Blackburn had not been hurt.
 
I was just looking at one of my favorite websites Hockeydb and doing a little day dreaming. If Dan Blackburn's career had not been ended by his freak injury, what would that have meant to the Rangers?

Assume for the sake of this discussion he continued to develop and had Henke as a backup. Give me your scenarios.

Balej20* 01-28-2007 02:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pizza (Post 7815572)
I was just looking at one of my favorite websites Hockeydb and doing a little day dreaming. If Dan Blackburn's career had not been ended by his freak injury, what would that have meant to the Rangers?

Assume for the sake of this discussion he continued to develop and had Henke as a backup. Give me your scenarios.

First of all, we don't draft Montoya. Weekes may or may not have been signed. If he was still signed, Henke doesn't come over when he does or he is sent straight to Hartford.

nyr2k2 01-28-2007 03:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Balej20 (Post 7815652)
First of all, we don't draft Montoya. Weekes may or may not have been signed. If he was still signed, Henke doesn't come over when he does or he is sent straight to Hartford.

Maybe we have Olesz and our second line center position is filled? Who the hell knows. You're right though, Monty aint here.

broadwayblue 01-28-2007 03:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nyr2k2 (Post 7815778)
Maybe we have Olesz and our second line center position is filled? Who the hell knows. You're right though, Monty aint here.

I think that's the only thing that changes. We end up with Olesz and Henrik is still the guy.

UAGoalieGuy 01-28-2007 06:52 AM

The Rangers probably draft one of Olesz, Smid, Radulov, or Thalen.

Edge 01-28-2007 04:36 PM

I think Lundqvist still makes the team and he and Blackburn battle for the starting job. I don't see Lundqvist going to Hartford with the way he played or staying there for very long if he does.

I think Montoya isn't drafted, you almost certainly get Olesz. That one I'll just about gurantee.

But that's the problem with the Rangers. Even when they draft good they get hit with an injury. It only serves to compound the times they draft like crap.

Essentially two if their first rounders in a 5-year span had to retire at around 21/22.

Sadly enough, both guys looked like NHL players.

Blackburn was a def. an NHL goalie and Chernkesi looked like a potential PF in a very similar mold to what Brendan Morrow has become. That changes a lot of things potentially.

Hypothetically you'd have a goalie tandem of Lundqvist and Blackburn. You'd have a second line of Cherneski-Olesz-Shanahan and you'd probably in general have a better team.

shoothepuck 01-28-2007 04:40 PM

Olesz gets drafted, not Montoya, Weekes isn't signed, and you have a great Lundqvist/Blackburn tandem.

jas 01-28-2007 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edge (Post 7820159)
You'd have a second line of Cherneski-Olesz-Shanahan and you'd probably in general have a better team.

:cry: :banghead: :pullhair: :madfire:

Edge 01-28-2007 04:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jas (Post 7820222)
:cry: :banghead: :pullhair: :madfire:

Such is life as a Ranger fan.

Cherneski was a kid I really, really liked.

He cared and he had a lot of heart. If nothing else I think he was making it as a third line player, but his work ethic and goal scoring touch made him a likely second liner.

Brent Fedyk will forever be a curse word to me.

jas 01-28-2007 04:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edge (Post 7820280)
Such is life as a Ranger fan.

Cherneski was a kid I really, really liked.

He cared and he had a lot of heart. If nothing else I think he was making it as a third line player, but his work ethic and goal scoring touch made him a likely second liner.

Brent Fedyk will forever be a curse word to me.

As will John Muckler.

Edge 01-28-2007 04:56 PM

Fedyk just pissed me off.

Guy was out of the game, had a medicore camp, got outplayed by a kid and in what is a cosmic joke the kid gets hurt 11 games into his aHL career.

Same damn themes that plague this team:

1. Trying to salvage a career for minimal payoff.

2. Vet getting outplayed in the preseason.

3. Kid earns spot and gets sent to AHL.

4. Bad luck/karma kicks in.

5. Rangers feel affects for years to come.

Edge 01-28-2007 04:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jas (Post 7820303)
As will John Muckler.

Muckler, Sather and a lot of those guys were saved by Gretzky and 2 or 3 amazing drafts.

Everything after that exposed them for what they really were: medicore coaches/executives at best.

jas 01-28-2007 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edge (Post 7820385)
Fedyk just pissed me off.

Guy was out of the game, had a medicore camp, got outplayed by a kid and in what is a cosmic joke the kid gets hurt 11 games into his aHL career.

Same damn themes that plague this team:

1. Trying to salvage a career for minimal payoff.

2. Vet getting outplayed in the preseason.

3. Kid earns spot and gets sent to AHL.

4. Bad luck/karma kicks in.

5. Rangers feel affects for years to come.

So much about that season still ticks me off, from Cherneski being sent down, (I can remember Brooks saying "not to worry, the kid will be back in no time"), to Muckler breaking up the best line in the NHL from the previous season, (Sundstrom/TGO/Kovalev were incredible in the last 25 games), to Savard not given a shot until after the Rangers dealt for Nedved, right down to Smith inexcuasbly not moving players like MacLean, Stevens (before the incident in STL) and Pilon to contenders while they had some value. That's where the Rangers could have conceivanly been rebuilt DURING THE SMITH TENURE. Imagine having kept that top line intact, with a 2nd line of Graves/Savard/Cherneski and the 3rd line of Knuble/Malhotra/Harvey. Just sad.

Edge 01-28-2007 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jas (Post 7820474)
So much about that season still ticks me off, from Cherneski being sent down, (I can remember Brooks saying "not to worry, the kid will be back in no time"), to Muckler breaking up the best line in the NHL from the previous season, (Sundstrom/TGO/Kovalev were incredible in the last 25 games), to Savard not given a shot until after the Rangers dealt for Nedved, right down to Smith inexcuasbly not moving players like MacLean, Stevens (before the incident in STL) and Pilon to contenders while they had some value. That's where the Rangers could have conceivanly been rebuilt DURING THE SMITH TENURE. Imagine having kept that top line intact, with a 2nd line of Graves/Savard/Cherneski and the 3rd line of Knuble/Malhotra/Harvey. Just sad.

And ironically those decisions by Smith lead to what in hindsight was an overreaction at the 99 draft where he tried to rebuild the team in one big swoop.

And that was only after his deal for Palffy fell through.

But yeah, you can point to the disaster of a year that would follow with that summer in 1998.

jas 01-28-2007 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edge (Post 7820504)
And ironically those decisions by Smith lead to what in hindsight was an overreaction at the 99 draft where he tried to rebuild the team in one big swoop.

And that was only after his deal for Palffy fell through.

But yeah, you can point to the disaster of a year that would follow with that summer in 1998.

Which is how things have been along ever since...trade Johnsson for Lindros, only having to trade for Poti to replace Johnsson.

SML 01-28-2007 05:10 PM

I think Blackburn would have been beaten out by Lundqvist by now. It was a terrible call to bring him up that early. The kid should have been playing in the WHL, dominating, and winning the Memorial cup. He SHOULD have had the chance to go to the WJC, where, depending on his performance, ironically, could have overshadowed Montoya, in which case the Rangers never pick him. That being said, they did call him up. Blackburn was a good goalie for a 18 year old kid in the NHL. I didn't think he was particularly strong technically. Maybe I was spoiled by watching Richter all those years, because Richter, until that time, had maybe the best post-to-post lateral movement I had ever seen. Blackburn was perhaps one of the worst in that regard. IIRC, it was a very awkward motion for him, where he would lunge from one side to the other, but his body would be falling forward at like a 45 degree angle. He never could stay squared up with the shooter while going side to side, and almost always wound up laying flat on his face in the crease. Which was dreadful considering the group we had and how well they cleared the net from rebound seekers:sarcasm: Anyway, with all that said, Lundqvist may be better than Richter side to side, I think he's probably the best I can think of. When guys at this level slump, all they have to fall back on is fundamentals, and I think Lundqvists' are extremely sound. So I think we'd have a backup in Blackburn, who would get the job done, but Lundqvist would have been starting by now. As for who we would have taken with the montoya pick, I prefer not to think about that.

Edge 01-28-2007 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SML (Post 7820542)
I think Blackburn would have been beaten out by Lundqvist by now. It was a terrible call to bring him up that early. The kid should have been playing in the WHL, dominating, and winning the Memorial cup. He SHOULD have had the chance to go to the WJC, where, depending on his performance, ironically, could have overshadowed Montoya, in which case the Rangers never pick him. That being said, they did call him up. Blackburn was a good goalie for a 18 year old kid in the NHL. I didn't think he was particularly strong technically. Maybe I was spoiled by watching Richter all those years, because Richter, until that time, had maybe the best post-to-post lateral movement I had ever seen. Blackburn was perhaps one of the worst in that regard. If I recall correctly, it was a very awkward motion for him, where he would lunge from one side to the other, but his body would be falling forward at like a 45 degree angle. He never could stay squared up with the shooter while going side to side, and almost always wound up laying flat on his face in the crease. Which was dreadful considering the group we had and how well they cleared the net from rebound seekers:sarcasm: Anyway, with all that said, Lundqvist may be better than Richter side to side, I think he's probably the best I can think of. When guys at this level slump, all they have to fall back on is fundamentals, and I think Lundqvists' are extremely sound. So I think we'd have a backup in Blackburn, who would get the job done, but Lundqvist would have been starting by now. As for who we would have taken with the montoya pick, I prefer not to think about that.


It's very possibly Lundqvist beats Blackburn out. Having said that, even if Blackburn is the back-up it changes two things.

A. You're not paying a decent amount of money for a back-up goalie.

B. You can go out and get a kid like Olesz instead of focusing on a goalie.


As for Blackburn, I personally had no problem with him playing in the NHL. I had a big problem with HOW he was played in the NHL. Blackburn was one of those kids who falls into the cracks of the collective bargaining agreement. He had outgrown the WHL and I do believe even now that there was nothing for him to do down there. In an ideal world he was playing in the AHL (something a kid like Staal should be doing).

But I thought Blackburn did about as well as ANY 18 year is going to do with a team like the Rangers. Obviously he wasn't the finished product so he had work to do, but Blackburn was very much the real deal.

Pizza 01-28-2007 06:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edge (Post 7820385)
Fedyk just pissed me off.

Guy was out of the game, had a medicore camp, got outplayed by a kid and in what is a cosmic joke the kid gets hurt 11 games into his aHL career.

Same damn themes that plague this team:

1. Trying to salvage a career for minimal payoff.

2. Vet getting outplayed in the preseason.

3. Kid earns spot and gets sent to AHL.

4. Bad luck/karma kicks in.

5. Rangers feel affects for years to come.

You sir, are a legend :bow:

chosen 01-28-2007 06:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pizza (Post 7815572)
I was just looking at one of my favorite websites Hockeydb and doing a little day dreaming. If Dan Blackburn's career had not been ended by his freak injury, what would that have meant to the Rangers?

Assume for the sake of this discussion he continued to develop and had Henke as a backup. Give me your scenarios.

What if Spartacus had a Piper Cub?

Pizza 01-28-2007 06:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chosen (Post 7821769)
What if Spartacus had a Piper Cub?

Well in that scenario he would have been better able to leverage a deal with the Cilician pirates and fly recon over Crassus' eight legions. Better knowledge of the ground would have given Spartacus the edge he needed to defeat Crassus in the epic second battle;)

GarretJoseph* 01-28-2007 08:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edge (Post 7820280)
Such is life as a Ranger fan.

Cherneski was a kid I really, really liked.

He cared and he had a lot of heart. If nothing else I think he was making it as a third line player, but his work ethic and goal scoring touch made him a likely second liner.

Brent Fedyk will forever be a curse word to me.


I really liked Cherneski too, not as much as I Liked Daniel Goneau though.. I thought he was gonna be the next coming of Gordie Howe.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:46 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.