View Single Post
Old
06-18-2008, 08:45 AM
  #24
HockeyBasedNYC
Registered User
 
HockeyBasedNYC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Here
Country: United States
Posts: 13,161
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by drcameraman View Post
This team will not make the playoffs if Jagr is not resigned. Gomez and Drury can't carry this team.
wow, so quick to say.

Might as well not even watch then if he doesnt sign.

I've been saying it since they shook hands in Pittsburgh. The Rangers should move away from Jagr if they want to help this team long term. Yeah he might help next season - but do you really think he'll take a one year deal?

Sather is waiting this out for that exact reason. He doesnt want to sign him to a 2-year or more deal. Neither would I. Who wants a 38 year old Jagr in 2010, that you have to piece together a team around when you've already spilled over into the third years of Drury and Gomez's contracts - without giving THEM the supporting cast they need to better the team?

Let's face it. Sather rolled out the red-carpet for Drury and Gomez and overpaid to get them. Thats said and done. I'm not going to complain about their contracts, thats already been discussed before. The reality is that you HAVE those contracts on the team and they are invested in your top two CENTERS. Common sense is to build around the middle up front. You gotta give these guys what they need so you arent left finally patching a team together around them 4 years into their contracts. Thats a waste to me. A total waste.

Any team Jaromir Jagr is on is HIS team. Whether you like it or not. Whether you agree with that notion or not. Its HIS team. Straka's retirement hinges on whether or not Jagr comes back (why he can't make his own decisions is a whole different story) Rucinsky has stated he would only play in the NHL with the Rangers if those two re-signed. Neither is even close to a lock to sign here if Jagr does but I guarantee this... SOMEONE will be signed to compliment Jagrs style of play.

A big word around here last season was "DEFER". Everyone on the ice was DEFERRING to Jagr. Even strength. On the Powerplay. In Practice. Off the ice. On the street. In the supermarket...
Everywhere.

You know damn well if Jagr is signed (most likely for two years) Sather will have to do whats best for Jagr and thats surrounding him with complimentary players that fit HIS needs, NOT the teams needs. Its more about what direction or style this team is heading in, and less about what Jagr brings to the table. Everyone seems to forget that for long stretches of the last season, Jagr wasn't putting up any numbers. Lines where all over the place. It happened in cycles until they finally found Dubinsky for him. But thats not the answer folks. Just because Jagr had a very good ending to the year does not suggest he will be like that right out of the gate or for over 75% of the next two seasons. Fans WILL regret it if they sign him. Slowly but surely, mark my words.

Now some of those who really want Jagr back will probably ask the question.... Who do you replace him with smart-ass?? The answer is this:

You don't, yet.

You could replace him with a guy like Hossa, but i dont think that will happen. He will cost too much, and who even knows if he even wants to play in NYC. So why NOT sign Jagr ? For all the reasons above and this - You get creative through trades and lower-tier signings that give you enough room to go after someone in July of 2009 or later. To me thats a better gamble to take then if you sign Jagr for 2 years. Not only will you have more cap room (if they allow themselves to), but a better idea of where the NHL stands financially (cap increase or not).

Next season, most of us are expecting a step back possibly. Then why have Jagr bridge a season or two when you can start whatever it is you envision this team being NOW.

Either way, its all about complimenting the young players you have worked so hard to bring along and the two centers you hit a homerun with on July 1, 2007. The Rangers would be taking the easy way out by signing Jagr, and thats exactly what was done wrong in the past.

Let me ask you this - If Jagr was on the Capitals or the Blue Jackets or the Kings this entire time - and he was just a plain free agent at 36 - would you sign him to a two or three year deal given the direction this team is heading in and the past summers the Rangers have post 1994?? Think about it.


Last edited by HockeyBasedNYC: 06-18-2008 at 08:54 AM.
HockeyBasedNYC is offline   Reply With Quote