HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   New York Rangers (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=24)
-   -   News Article: Sather returns to familiar formula (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=852663)

RangerBoy 12-13-2010 07:31 AM

Sather returns to familiar formula
 
Glen Sather spoke to Roy MacGregor(long-time hockey columnist based out of Ottawa).

Some revisionist history from Slats from when he first become Rangers czar in June 2000. Main point is the Rangers are building(FINALLY) with their own. Sather claims that was his intention from the very beginning.

Quote:

If the years have taught Sather one thing, it is that big-name, big-dollar signings of aging veterans is just too high a risk: “It never works out.”

In today’s NHL, he says, the reality of the salary cap and the ability of young players to become free agents in their prime have forced the Rangers to re-think strategy. The notion of an Oilers’ type dynasty ever occurring again is unlikely, he believes.

Quote:

“Glen operates out of a comfort zone,” one long-time friend says. “He gets on great with the ownership and the organization makes so much money with its teams and cable deals that there’s really no pressure on him to produce right away. It’s not that they don’t have to win, but sort of. … He has them convinced to be patient.”
Funny quote from Sather on Avery being a hockey player 65% of the time which is an improvement from when Avery first joined the Rangers in 2007 when he had a publicist.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sport...articlecontent

Doesn't sound like Sather has any plans to step down or retire. He likes the adventure.

MadHookUp 12-13-2010 07:40 AM

I made a post months ago during the offseason asking people if they would keep Sather, assuming that he has learned his lesson. I forgot the responses, but I for one am happy with Sather as GM as long as he stops overpaying mediocre UFAs. With the young talent making its way up, he has less of a reason to do so.

azrok22 12-13-2010 07:46 AM

Quote:

So you build from within, a strategy almost unknown in New York. “It actually started here in the beginning,” he says, “but first you have to get rid of the stuff.” Including, he admits, his own stuff that did not work out, from forward Scott Gomez (signed to a $51.5-million deal over seven years, later traded to Montreal Canadiens) to Redden and current enforcer Derek Boogaard, who is being paid $1.625-million a year to have other players refuse to fight him.
This language indicates that the Rangers are trying to move Boogaard.

Not sure that I buy that.

Bleed Ranger Blue 12-13-2010 08:17 AM

The Gaborik signing 2 offseasons ago is a direct contradiction to this article.

The reality of the situation is Sather has very little cap space to work with due to past mistakes, and really has no choice at this point.

Trxjw 12-13-2010 08:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue (Post 29537500)
The Gaborik signing 2 offseasons ago is a direct contradiction to this article.

The reality of the situation is Sather has very little cap space to work with due to past mistakes, and really has no choice at this point.

Bingo. I'm not sure how anyone can believe he's anti-UFA with Wade Redden sitting in Hartford and Chris Drury on the IR.

LamoTheKid 12-13-2010 08:46 AM

I've said it before and I'll say it again; the salary cap is the best thing to happen to this team in a while. There have been growing pains and stupidity but it's forced Sather to build from within while the bead contracts expire.

I'm just worried what he'll do with the cap space once he gets it back.

Vito Andolini 12-13-2010 08:58 AM

It wasn't long ago that this franchises future looked hopeless with huge sums of money invested long-term in overpaid & underproducing players who may also have been locker room distractions. I seriously doubt Dolan would have allowed Sather to bury all of these bums in the AHL.

I'd love to read the tone of this story if the Rangers were still saddled with the Gomez & Kotalik contracts. And no I don't look at those deals and wonder with amazement at Sather's trade skills. I look at it less as how did Sather trade these guys, and more as how did Sutter & Gainey trade FOR these guys. Pathetic mistakes by them. Sather just got flat out lucky here.

RangerBoy 12-13-2010 08:59 AM

Marian Gaborik was not past his prime. He was 27 years old when the Rangers signed him to the 5 year deal. Health was his biggest issue. Not age or lack of production.

Wade Redden was an aging vet. 31 years old. He was horrible in Ottawa before signing in NY.

Quote:

Sather says the responsibility is entirely his – “That's part of the deal of being GM” – but adds that he remains baffled at Redden's astonishing demise as a player. Redden, after all, had once been kept by the Ottawa Senators over Zdeno Chara, whom they let go to the Boston Bruins.

When the Rangers discussed the possibility of signing Redden of Lloydminster, Sask., the belief was he could run the power play, kill penalties, provide that critical first pass out of a zone and score himself when necessary.

“We never saw any of that,” Sather says.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sport...rticle1834862/

The Rangers weren't watching Redden in Ottawa?:shakehead

Pizza 12-13-2010 10:07 AM

Amazing...just amazing.

Sather is a remarkable character. The biggest irony is that it might just work out for all of us in the end.

SingnBluesOnBroadway 12-13-2010 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RangerBoy (Post 29537856)
Marian Gaborik was not past his prime. He was 27 years old when the Rangers signed him to the 5 year deal. Health was his biggest issue. Not age or lack of production.

But the M.O. was the same: committing big money to a guy with question marks. And, in the case of Garborik, the signing came after he managed to move another big contract he gave to a guy who had question marks.

HAPPY HOUR 12-13-2010 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RangerBoy (Post 29537856)
Marian Gaborik was not past his prime. He was 27 years old when the Rangers signed him to the 5 year deal. Health was his biggest issue. Not age or lack of production.

Wade Redden was an aging vet. 31 years old. He was horrible in Ottawa before signing in NY.



http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sport...rticle1834862/

The Rangers weren't watching Redden in Ottawa?:shakehead

How could Ranger management not see Redden plod around the ice with his head in the clouds from the winter of 2007 straight through the playoffs? He was atrocious.
The only thing I can think of was that with the unfortunate loss of his mom, perhaps they thought a change of scenery was the answer.
Thats was a huge dumb gamble to take on the"change of scenery theory".

Bluenote13 12-13-2010 10:25 AM

The fact that he was baffled at the demise of Redden should automatically remove him from a position of power in the NHL, plain and simple.

Blueshirt Special 12-13-2010 10:27 AM

I'm ok with Gaborik since it was really a correction to the Gomez signing, which was really disappointing.

RMcDonagh 12-13-2010 10:28 AM

Gaborik was still a risky signing, and yeah, I'm not buying any of this "no FA" type management they seem to be embarking on. At least, not those that are aged and will be overpaid.

He overpaid for Boogaard this summer. Other than that, sure, he didn't make many mistakes, and maybe he's going to stay away from the Redden's and Drury's (meaning no $5M+ contracts for question marks), but he can still give out terrible contracts and he will.

SingnBluesOnBroadway 12-13-2010 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blueshirt Special (Post 29538881)
I'm ok with Gaborik since it was really a correction to the Gomez signing, which was really disappointing.

But the correction was made in the same manner as the original mistake was.

Puckface NYR* 12-13-2010 10:42 AM

I dont care if we win a cup this year next year or whenever with Sather at the helm

Ten years of mistakes. Mistakes that have set us back years. I dont understand how anyone can forgive this guy. Any team in a market and attractive atmosphere like the Rangers should be able to build a competitive team.

Sathers a joke and he always will be in my mind.

pld459666 12-13-2010 10:42 AM

Sather has pretty much laid all the blame for not rebuilding from day one at the feet of ownership. He's done this quite a few times.

He's full of crp.

NYR Sting 12-13-2010 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RangerBoy (Post 29537856)
The Rangers weren't watching Redden in Ottawa?:shakehead

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bluenote13 (Post 29538865)
The fact that he was baffled at the demise of Redden should automatically remove him from a position of power in the NHL, plain and simple.

I've been saying this since the day it happened. There are only two possible starting points to the Wade Redden nightmare (although the same can be applied to either Drury or Gomez, since it should have been clear to ANYONE who knows this sport how either of those moves would work out): either Glen Sather doesn't even watch games and signed Wade Redden based on name value alone (which would make him an irresponsible person who is awful at his job) or he does watch...and has absolutely no ****ing clue what he's watching anymore, which would make him a moron.

I'm not sure which option is worse. It could be both.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway (Post 29538678)
But the M.O. was the same: committing big money to a guy with question marks. And, in the case of Garborik, the signing came after he managed to move another big contract he gave to a guy who had question marks.

Exactly. And he could have not signed Gaborik and instead actually tried finishing that rebuild that was never really started.

Midnight85 12-13-2010 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway (Post 29538902)
But the correction was made in the same manner as the original mistake was.

I have to disagree at least to extent. Yes both are big time siginings, but different in that the players themselves are nothing alike.

Gomez was coming off a 60 point year in which he didn't crack 20 goals. He only scored 30 once.

Gaborik was hurt but scored 23 points in 17 games to go along with 13 goals. He went on a tear when he returned that year, and the year before scored 40+ goals.

What I'm saying is Gabroik was a bonafide goal scoring superstar. If his medicals checked out, physical etc, he's an important piece, because that kind of player isn't/wasn't in the system.

Its a lot easier to look at this one in hindsight though since Gabby scored 40 last year. But I do think there is a big difference in players, if you don't take into account that difference in players then your basically saying you'd never sign anyone over "x" amount of dollars, and I think there are still situations where big signings are acceptable.

SingnBluesOnBroadway 12-13-2010 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Midnight85 (Post 29539365)
I have to disagree at least to extent. Yes both are big time siginings, but different in that the players themselves are nothing alike.

Gomez was coming off a 60 point year in which he didn't crack 20 goals. He only scored 30 once.

Gaborik was hurt but scored 23 points in 17 games to go along with 13 goals. He went on a tear when he returned that year, and the year before scored 40+ goals.

What I'm saying is Gabroik was a bonafide goal scoring superstar. If his medicals checked out, physical etc, he's an important piece, because that kind of player isn't/wasn't in the system.

Its a lot easier to look at this one in hindsight though since Gabby scored 40 last year. But I do think there is a big difference in players, if you don't take into account that difference in players then your basically saying you'd never sign anyone over "x" amount of dollars, and I think there are still situations where big signings are acceptable.

The bold shows why the MO was the same. There was a definite risk involved.

Midnight85 12-13-2010 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway (Post 29539389)
The bold shows why the MO was the same. There was a definite risk involved.

Which is true, it was a risk. But none of us were privy to his physical information.

If it was indeed true that his hip problem was the cause of the frequent groin pulls... if it all checked out and all the medical staff was confident in it, the risk lessens considerably.

Totally different kind of risks as well, injured superstar/vs guy you're hoping develops into superstar.

Vito Andolini 12-13-2010 11:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sting36e (Post 29539292)
Exactly. And he could have not signed Gaborik and instead actually tried finishing that rebuild that was never really started.

Quote:

“It’s a building process,” he says. “The process would be a lot easier if we could have ended in last place the last four or five years.”

But then, it is suggested, he wouldn’t be here, would he?

“Probably,” he admits, and takes an imaginary draw on the unlighted cigar.
So in other words he took the easy way out. Rather than answering for his past mistakes and allowing the team to build top talent through the draft as it likely would have after dealing Gomez, he decided to buy it (with it's inherent risks) and avoid the probability of being fired.

Trxjw 12-13-2010 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sting36e (Post 29539292)
Exactly. And he could have not signed Gaborik and instead actually tried finishing that rebuild that was never really started.

Worth mentioning that without Gaborik last year we almost certainly would have been looking at a lottery pick.

NYR Sting 12-13-2010 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vito Andolini (Post 29539607)
So in other words he took the easy way out. Rather than answering for his past mistakes and allowing the team to build top talent through the draft as it likely would have after dealing Gomez, he decided to buy it (with it's inherent risks) and avoid the probability of being fired.

And avoid the probability of building a legitimate Stanley Cup contender, as well.

Oh, but we're drafting good young players! Look! We've developed some role players and 2nd liners! Hooray for Sather! :sarcasm:

NYR Sting 12-13-2010 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trxjw (Post 29539650)
Worth mentioning that without Gaborik last year we almost certainly would have been looking at a lottery pick.

Absolutely. Forget about Hall and Seguin...can you imagine if we come away with a Johansen? Gudbranson? Connolly? Skinner? Burmistrov? Any one of those guys solves a major, major organizational issue.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:41 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.