HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   New York Rangers (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=24)
-   -   Could Kevin Weeks be a Ranger at the draft? (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=84996)

jdsrangers 06-19-2004 08:43 AM

Could Kevin Weeks be a Ranger at the draft?
 
Carolina needs to trade Weeks. They know they can't sign him. They just picked up Gerber and will need to trade Weeks.

Maybe Sather will trade one of our #2 picks for him. Weeks would be an upgrade over Dunny. Weeks was the reason Carolina stayed in as many games as they did. He made some really great saves. He was on the 3 stars of the game move than any other Cane! :yo:

I would really like to see us get weeks! Your thoughts...

:teach: P.S: The only problem that I see is that he is still young with an upside and Sather seems to look for older players looking back at their best days! :banghead: :cry:

SingnBluesOnBroadway 06-19-2004 08:51 AM

I would certainly trade Jan Hlavac for him :lol: :banana:

I wonder how many poeple here will get that reference.

rnyquist 06-19-2004 09:02 AM

hE'S an upgrade over Dunham, but we're still stuck with DUnham. I think Weekes will end up in Toronto

Prucha73 06-19-2004 09:15 AM

I think they will re-sign Weekes.

Davisian 06-19-2004 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway
I would certainly trade Jan Hlavac for him

I wonder how many poeple here will get that reference.


Are you talking to me?

There's nobody else around, so you must be talking to me..

About 4 years too late, but I'd still like to see Mr. Weekes join the team!

RangerBoy 06-19-2004 09:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdsrangers
Carolina needs to trade Weeks. They know they can't sign him. They just picked up Gerber and will need to trade Weeks.

Maybe Sather will trade one of our #2 picks for him. Weeks would be an upgrade over Dunny. Weeks was the reason Carolina stayed in as many games as they did. He made some really great saves. He was on the 3 stars of the game move than any other Cane! :yo:

I would really like to see us get weeks! Your thoughts...

:teach: P.S: The only problem that I see is that he is still young with an upside and Sather seems to look for older players looking back at their best days! :banghead: :cry:

Kevin Weekes made $2.35 million last season.If gets tendered a qualifying offer and he goes to arbitration,that becomes a problem

The stupid arbitrator always awards a hefty increase.They split the difference between the team and player submitted offers

If Weekes receives $3-4 million in arbitration,his team should walk away

Weekes is not an upgrade over Mike Dunham

RangerBoy 06-19-2004 09:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prucha73
I think they will re-sign Weekes.

Carolina may not give Weekes a qualifying offer

SingnBluesOnBroadway 06-19-2004 09:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Davisian
Are you talking to me?

There's nobody else around, so you must be talking to me..

About 4 years too late, but I'd still like to see Mr. Weekes join the team!

Yes I am talking to you.

I feell shame.

jdsrangers 06-19-2004 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RangerBoy
Kevin Weekes made $2.35 million last season.If gets tendered a qualifying offer and he goes to arbitration,that becomes a problem

The stupid arbitrator always awards a hefty increase.They split the difference between the team and player submitted offers

If Weekes receives $3-4 million in arbitration,his team should walk away

Weekes is not an upgrade over Mike Dunham

How can you say Weeks is not an upgrade over Dunham? :help: How many games did he keep the Rangers in games after the 1st month of the season? He would give up a soft goal just when you would think he was going to keep us in the game.

:teach: Weeks on the other hand keep the Canes in most games. He can and will make the big save with very little team support.

Weeks is what we need but like I said before he doesn't fit the Sather mold of old , overpaid and no upside!! :shakehead :banghead:

dedalus 06-19-2004 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdsrangers
Weeks is what we need

Need for what? The team's drive for the Stanley Cup next season? Why would anyone be interested in a modest upgrading of the goaltending. This team's goaltending is in the future. It's Blackburn, Lundquist, or who knows, maybe Montoya.

Swapping Dunham for Weekes gains this team nothing except potentially a few points in the standings; but why would we be so anxious to gain a few points in the standings? This team is challenging for nothing next year. They're infinitely closer to Crosby than they are to a Cup, so what is the rush to tinker with next year's team to make it better but still not good enough? And why would you trade a futures commodity in the form of a pick in order to MAKE that team better-but-still-not-good-enough?

NYR469 06-19-2004 10:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RangerBoy
Carolina may not give Weekes a qualifying offer

that is a realistic possibility...but why trade for him if you think that is a likely scenario??

i say force carolina to give him a qualifying offer and risk getting stuck with him...if they don't qualify him then he becomes a UFA and we could pick him up for just $$

jdsrangers 06-19-2004 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dedalus
Need for what? The team's drive for the Stanley Cup next season? Why would anyone be interested in a modest upgrading of the goaltending. This team's goaltending is in the future. It's Blackburn, Lundquist, or who knows, maybe Montoya.

Swapping Dunham for Weekes gains this team nothing except potentially a few points in the standings; but why would we be so anxious to gain a few points in the standings? This team is challenging for nothing next year. They're infinitely closer to Crosby than they are to a Cup, so what is the rush to tinker with next year's team to make it better but still not good enough? And why would you trade a futures commodity in the form of a pick in order to MAKE that team better-but-still-not-good-enough?


I am looking at it from being a long time season ticket holder. Weeks will help them win games today and he is still young and could be a chip to trade along with Blackburn, Lundquist, or who knows, maybe Montoya, to bring in some young forward & "D" talent in the future. :yo:

You can never have enough good goaltenders. Weeks has proven he can make the saves at an NHL level all the others have promise BUT the jusy is still out on each one whether they can play in the NHL. The closest is Blackburn (after his injury)and who knows if he will ever be a #1 goaltender.

I want a young team that has a chance to win and it all starts with the goaltender! Paying $6,000 a year to see the team, I want the best "young" team on the ice each night! :handclap: I don't want to go to games where they have no chance of winning! :teach:

Blackburn, Lundquist, or who knows, maybe Montoya are years away from the NHL. Weeks will be your starter for years to come! He can be had without giving up much (2nd round pick plus a prospect).
This is a trade Sather should be looking to make on draft day! :bow:

RangerBoy 06-19-2004 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdsrangers
How can you say Weeks is not an upgrade over Dunham? :help: How many games did he keep the Rangers in games after the 1st month of the season? He would give up a soft goal just when you would think he was going to keep us in the game.

:teach: Weeks on the other hand keep the Canes in most games. He can and will make the big save with very little team support.

Weeks is what we need but like I said before he doesn't fit the Sather mold of old , overpaid and no upside!! :shakehead :banghead:

How can you say Kevin Weekes is an upgrade over Mike Dunham?

How many teams has Weekes been on and why is his current team considering shipping him out?

Florida

Vancouver

Islanders

Tampa Bay

Carolina

Isn't that a concern?

Weekes is a lateral move,it does not make them better :shakehead

Where is the upside with Weekes?He is 29 years old and has never posted a winning season

Weekes is overpaid,getting older and has no upside

Are you the same guy who wanted Radek Bonk last month?

Oh yea,another guy with upside

dedalus 06-19-2004 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdsrangers
I am looking at it from being a long time season ticket holder .... I want a young team that has a chance to win and it all starts with the goaltender! Paying $6,000 a year to see the team, I want the best "young" team on the ice each night! I don't want to go to games where they have no chance of winning!

That's fair enough. Your priority is wins. Mine is building and the building goes better and easier when you're using top draft picks to do it. I'll swap some wins for the chance to get a Kovalchuk, Gaborik, Nash, or Heatley.

RangerBoy 06-19-2004 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYR469
that is a realistic possibility...but why trade for him if you think that is a likely scenario??

i say force carolina to give him a qualifying offer and risk getting stuck with him...if they don't qualify him then he becomes a UFA and we could pick him up for just $$

Tell that to the starter of this thread

RangerBoy 06-19-2004 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdsrangers
How can you say Weeks is not an upgrade over Dunham? :help: How many games did he keep the Rangers in games after the 1st month of the season? He would give up a soft goal just when you would think he was going to keep us in the game.

:teach: Weeks on the other hand keep the Canes in most games. He can and will make the big save with very little team support.

Weeks is what we need but like I said before he doesn't fit the Sather mold of old , overpaid and no upside!! :shakehead :banghead:

I'm glad you are not the Rangers GM

You would be worse than Sather

jdsrangers 06-19-2004 12:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RangerBoy
Tell that to the starter of this thread

I am the starter of this thread and it makes me :lol: to think that you feel players likes Weeks are going to be let go when he has trade value!


The Canes will try to trade him before they let him go for nothing! Their is interest in him. The Canes can't afford him but know he has trade value! :shakehead

jdsrangers 06-19-2004 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RangerBoy
I'm glad you are not the Rangers GM

You would be worse than Sather

Hey Rangerboy: I have been a fan for over 35 years...season ticket holder for 20! The difference between me & you is that I want to see the team have a chance to wining each game. :jump:

If I wanted to see minor league hockey, I would get Wolfpack tickets. I go to every game and want a younger rebuilding team with a chance to win each game. I would like to see Sater trade some of the 2nd round picks for some NHL ready players (not old guys--under 30 that want to win).

Rangerboy: I have stuck with this team & I will continue to support them as long as they look to put a team on the ice that has a chance to win.

:teach: P.S.: I would make an excellent GM. My goal would be to build around our young players...we need to get some more young NHL ready talent for the start of next season.

Hey Rangerboy:If the team stands pat, I'll be more than happy to sell you half my season tickets, after all the team you saw at the end of the season is the team you must want to start the season!! Put your money where your mouth is!! :shakehead

dedalus 06-19-2004 12:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdsrangers
I want to see the team have a chance to wining each game .... If I wanted to see minor league hockey, I would get Wolfpack tickets. I go to every game and want a younger rebuilding team with a chance to win each game.

What you want is to have your cake and eat it too. The idea that the Rangers should rebuild while remaining competitive night-in-night-out has been the organizational philosophy for the last eight years. Neil Smith liked to call it "re-tooling" and it didn't work for him, nor has it worked for Sather.

The concession you make in a genuine rebuilding is that you recognize that you WON'T have a chance to win each game. You accept the fact that the good teams are going to beat you 4 games out of 6 and elite teams are going to crush you almost every time. What you get in exchange for recognizing that fact is the chance to draft Fleury or Luongo or Kovalchuk or Heatley or Ovechkin at the end of the season.

jdsrangers 06-19-2004 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dedalus
What you want is to have your cake and eat it too. The idea that the Rangers should rebuild while remaining competitive night-in-night-out has been the organizational philosophy for the last eight years. Neil Smith liked to call it "re-tooling" and it didn't work for him, nor has it worked for Sather.

The concession you make in a genuine rebuilding is that you recognize that you WON'T have a chance to win each game. You accept the fact that the good teams are going to beat you 4 games out of 6 and elite teams are going to crush you almost every time. What you get in exchange for recognizing that fact is the chance to draft Fleury or Luongo or Kovalchuk or Heatley or Ovechkin at the end of the season.

dedalus-- The players that you bring up we picked very early in the draft. Some players picked before Healy& Luongo haven't made it to the NHL. The Rangers problem has been their drafting. :dunno: Its a no brainer to draft Ovechkin but lets see who we draft at #6. Teams have picked up some really good players in the later rounds, under Sather & Smith drafting has been real bad! How many 1st & 2nd round draft picks have played a major role in the NHL?:banghead: This Draft pattern has to change.

:teach: My point is we have 5 second round picks. If possible Sather needs to trade a couple for NHL ready younger players. When he trade all the vets last March, he choose to stockpile draft picks instead of picking uo players that were playing in the NHL.

:teach: This season Sather will have some younger players available (because of the CBA issues) because teams will look to unload salary. He must look to add young NHL ready talent while using the rest of the picks he keeps to build for the future.

This is Sather chance to shine!!

free0717 06-19-2004 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prucha73
I think they will re-sign Weekes.

Why would Carolina sign Weekes when they just got Gerber?

free0717 06-19-2004 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYR469
that is a realistic possibility...but why trade for him if you think that is a likely scenario??

i say force carolina to give him a qualifying offer and risk getting stuck with him...if they don't qualify him then he becomes a UFA and we could pick him up for just $$

Good Idea.

klingsor 06-19-2004 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway
I would certainly trade Jan Hlavac for him :lol: :banana:

I wonder how many poeple here will get that reference.

LMAO

We never shoulda let that "Interim Executive Vice President of MSG" retire.

Prucha73 06-19-2004 05:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by free0717
Why would Carolina sign Weekes when they just got Gerber?

Because they just got rid of Irbe, last time I checked you need 2 goalies.

dedalus 06-19-2004 08:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdsrangers
dedalus-- The players that you bring up we picked very early in the draft. Some players picked before Healy& Luongo haven't made it to the NHL. The Rangers problem has been their drafting. Its a no brainer to draft Ovechkin but lets see who we draft at #6.

But that's exactly the point. Picking at #6 IS a riskier proposition than picking at #2 which is why you want the higher pick.

It's also a safer proposition than picking at #11, and this is why the team shouldn't be looking to achieve some kind of minor improvement by trading to acquire a player who upgrades them a modest degree. All that Kevin Weekes can possibly get you is a few more wins. He doesn't get you into the playoffs any more than he got Carolina into the playoffs, and in failing to do so while picking up some points, he drops you from the safer pick to the riskier pick.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:09 AM.

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.