View Single Post
08-12-2004, 08:02 PM
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Tromelin
Posts: 9,481
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Edge
So to avoid that unpleasent situation we sign none of them?

There's no denying that, but especially with Lunqvist there is no denying that he should be over this season. Going with an all or nothing plan doesnt help anyone.

Well for starters Labarbera and Valiquette are not the future for this team in goal. And the issue isn't signing all of them so much as at least one of them. The argument for having all three in Hartford makes perfect sense, but there is no reason that at least one of them isn't in Hartford.

Playing less games is perfectly worthwhile if they are in a direction to get you to the NHL. If Lunqvist only played 35 games in Hartford it would still be worthwhile because he's getting adjusted to the north american.

All this team has done is delayed the situation for a year by signing none of them. Now next year this team is in another situation where they're gonna have two young goalies with nothing left to prove in their respective league's. That is a problem i have. By not signing either Lunqvist or Montoya we've just pushed the problem back till next year.

Meanwhile now our goaltending at Hartford will consist of Labarbera and whoever else till about 3 months into the season.

Of course this is assuming that Blackburn even can come back from December to April. He might need another year in Hartford on top of that.

There was enough room for at least one of these guys next year, at least Lunqvist. But it came down to money. The Rangers are trying to get cutesy and overplay their hand because they can tell the kid "Well we have player x here so we don't NEED to sign you". It's always when the Rangers try to get cute that they start screwing things up.

Putting all your eggs in one basket is one thing, dumping the basket on the floor and leaving yourself with nothing is another.

Assuming their is a lockout, at least one of them could have been splitting the time with Labarbera for the first three months of the season. Afterwards it would be a little more of a three way split, but personally i really don't care how much icetime Labarbera gets after that point. He doesn't represent the future of this team in goal, so after that {we'll say Lunqvist because i think he is more pro ready than Montoya} Lunqvist and Blackburn get the majority of starts. Blackburn when he comes back is going to need time anyway, he's not just gonna jump and start playing.

There is no denying your point against signing both, but they needed to sign at least one. What essentially happened here is they overplayed their hand. They didn't get Lunqvist because they thought they were gonna sign Montoya, but when Montoya wasn't stupid and didn't sign the first contract put in front of him they were left with a hand full of nothing.

The Rangers will say all season this is how they wanted things, but believe me it's not what they planned. They'll insist it was their idea and they'll all cover for each other, but it's the same story from MSG. When something goes right, no one can wait to take credit. When something goes wrong, everyone goes into coverup mode.
edge don't you think if there wasn't an impending lockout the eurpoean prospects would be signed?

is it possible montoya asked for more money than he is worth? does it really matter that the rangers have wasted money in the past?

Son of Steinbrenner is offline