Why do the Rangers have the same problems, year, after year, after year, after year?
View Single Post
02-09-2011, 01:34 PM
Join Date: Jun 2010
Originally Posted by
There's nothing inadvertent about it. Obviously I'm advocating a tank, or at least I did, when it was still a viable option for this team.
Then you said not to compare to isles and other teams that have tanked but have failed. This is a contradiction. Either you talk about all the teams that tanked and their results or you're not being fair.
No team that has won a Stanley Cup since the lockout has done so without undergoing a tremendous rebuild first. Zero. Not one. Until that changes, my opinion (which is based on nothing more than common sense and logic, the likes of which I just presented) would seem to be the valid one.
That's fine I said if this is your opinion then good for you. But first we are talking about fielding an elite team. one deserving of the cup. Plenty of teams are "Deserving" but failed within inches. That in my eyes does not diminish what they had built that one year. But if you feel this way about tanking then you should be able to say "The Rangers won't win a cup, division or even make the finals b/c they won't be that caliber of team unless they tank" yet you can't or won't say it...Like Is aid tanking is far from a guarantee. If it worked 100% theeeen it's a fact. it doesn't. So I don't subscribe to this tank theory. It's possibly untrue. Sorry but your belief might not be 100% true. You might be wrong. I've said nothing more than this.
No, I'm not saying that at all. You are saying that because you have an agenda to attack me but you can't actually argue things that I say without contorting them to such a degree that they completely lack resemblance to my original point. I said nothing about late first, second or third round picks. Your point is completely irrelevant.
it's just a debate my friend. i suggest not being so sensitive to attacks b/c nothing I put was an attack. I did say you might be wrong. might be...If that's an attack then I dunno what to say.
I've done nothing of the sort. You are a liar. I never said anything about drafting well outside of the top of the draft.
You advocate a tank as the ONLY way. you also implied the steals won't be there later in the draft...well ok what about late in the 1st or in the 2nd-4th round? There will always be steals. There may not be any like Zetterberg who is a steal mainly b/c only the Wings scouted correctly overseas but there will still be steals. Where did I lie?
"The Red Wings didn't get lucky with Zetterberg. Most teams just never devoted enough scouting to Russia and Sweden. Zetterberg, Lundqvist, Datsyuk...IMO, it is HIGHLY unlikwly that we'll see players that good get drafted that late ever again. Everyone is scouting those nations now, because now everyone realizes the value of it."
Like I said there can still be late 1sts-4ths and prob even 7th's that WILL be steals. I understand you were saying no future euros will be steals JUST b/c they are euros but you are ALSO saying you need to tank to get that elite player. So I feel it's relevant to discuss the fact that there ARE elite steals later in drafts and will continue to be some. Doesn't matter if they're Euro's or not teams gotta catch lightning in a bottle.
You cand raft outside the top 5 and still come up with the type of gold that wins cups. Agree or disagree? Based on what you said earlier it sounds like you disagree and that you think teams have to tank and they can never ever draft well enough to win the cup outside of tanking. That's what you said. If we had drafted Parise why would we be unable to win the cup? One of our current prospects could turn out that good. And our current overall team could be enough to win especially if you add a player like that...Hell even another player around Dubs level might be enough to add. I have a hard time believing Tavares/Stamkos had to be taken to win but Parise/Giroux couldn't be answers. Also if you continue to quote me why don't you ever quote all the relevant surrounding sentences to my points? You only quote one line but leave out the lines around it that explain further. Are you not able to comprehend their importance or are you trying to be sneaky when you debate?
It's not an opinion at all. It's fact. The Rangers have not been more than a mediocre team since the 1990s. The standings support that statement. Also, what I said was simply quoting, almost word for word, what someone who is currently a member of an NHL team's front office, one with strong ties to the Ranger organization, said to me less than a year ago.
Define mediocre and tell me the team from 03 should be applied to the team and farm we see today. Certainly you're not silly enough to pretend the organization is exactly the same today as it was every single year from 1990-today? Sorry but one single person's quote there isn't enough to mean anything.
Once again, you are a blatant liar. I never said anything of the sort. Please address things that I actually say rather than accusing me of saying things that I didn't. What I said was that leaving the entire possibility of contending for a Stanley Cup to the chance that ONE player may or may not reach free agency is a terrible way to manage a team because if the player does not reach free agency or sign with your team, you are, in effect, screwed.
Explain how I lied there or anywhere really b/c I didn't. You can say I did but that doesn't make it true.
Leaving it to chance a FA is available is bad but leaving it to the chance that the year you tank a 18 year old kid might just happen to be the 1 pick and turn out good enough to compliment the guys who couldn't win squat before is soooo different right? Columbus, St. Louis, Washington, Isles, Coyotes should I keep going? Philly...oh wait they never tanked they've just been managed well consistently...Montreal...wait they never tanked either they too have been consistent...Buffalo....wait same thing...San Jose...my god almost all the teams that lead the league perennially have been doing so thanks to good drafting, trades and free agent signings! Oh but several of those teams ONLY win their division year after year. They ONLY make it to game 7 of the cup finals. Yes clearly this is grounds for disqualifying them all out of hand!
Originally Posted by
That's not what I said. That's what YOU said.
very mature. Read above.
Sorry, but I'm not going to say what you want me to say so that you can manage to discredit me. I understand that the only way you can argue with me is to accuse me of saying things that I didn't say, but you can't possibly expect me to agree to be complacent in it, can you?
Read above. Just wanted to see if you would stand by your words a little more firmly. So lemme get this straight you feel uncomfortable saying "The Rangers will never win a division or even make it to a cup finals over the next ten years without tanking first?" You feel so strongly that tanking is the answer then please at least tell me what your problem is with this statement. Forget it's me just look at the statement. be fair and tell me if you can agree with that statement or not. If you can't then clearly you feel tanking is not the ONLY way. Since several teams win their divisions and make it to the finals every year without tanking I'd have to say your tank theory is just a gross overgeneralization with no proof other than circumstantial evidence.
I never said the organization didn't improve. Things should be good is a meaningless, vague, and completely subjective statement, since the majority of the people here think that good = 6-8 place and 20-25 goal role players. That's not my definition of good.
So we're not allowed to discuss how our good prospects and rookies who are performing well look like a good sign but you can talk about how the completely subjective point of "tanking is the only way to win...if you don't tank you will never even be capable of winning no matter how well you draft, trade and sign FA's"
The right things according to who? You? I see, so later in this post, you attack me for being unhappy that the organization doesn't do what I want, but when they do what you want, it's the "right things." What an incredible hypocrite.
Did I say that they did the right things because it was what I want? No I didn't. I thought signing gabs was way too risky. I Hated the McI pick. I hated letting Jags go for Drury but loved signing Gomer. I hated not going after Chara but was excited about Redden
. I was not fond of Kotalik, Higgins, Boogie signings. But I also liked signing Frolov (and still do b/c it's already over and we won't suffer long term) and liked the Sangs pick. I could go on and on about the FA i wish we'd signed or hadn't etc.
So no they haven't done what I wanted but i'm man enough to admit that the team knew better than me a few times or at least fixed their enormous errors and as a result are much better off. I may have thought two years ago this team would be a piece of sh** for years but now with Step, AA, Staal< girardi, Sauer, McD, Dubs, Cally, prust, boyle plus the guys we have on the way? Forgive me for being optimistic. All I'm saying is I don't think it's right to discount optimism here and attack fans because we support the organization. And it seems like you are insulting people because we support the org when it didn't do what YOU wanted. You can disagree with us but no need to act like a bully and start lumping us in as fools especially when your stance is no more solid than ours.
I don't think that the organization has done the right things overall in the last 5 years. What the organization has done in the last 5 things is gone from doing the completely wrong things over and over again, to doing enough to be decent. Essentially, the things that any competently run team does. The right things, which is doing whatever is necessary to acquire elite young talent, they have refused to do, which is why today, they are, once again, a bubble playoff team, just as they were last year, just as they were the year before, and just like they will be next year if they fail to acquire Brad Richards.
That's your opinion but are you really so close minded that you can't see the rationale behind getting optimistic based on the improvement of our current NHLers and potential of the prospects we have? it's funny we have elite guys but since we haven't won and our best is a goalie it automatically means that it's only b/c goalies don't win anymore...has nothing to do with the rest of the team. The team itself is getting better across the board. This is the main reason why I'm excited. This is a better team even if we have a 5th place finish. We had enormous injuries and now we will have an adjustment period not to mention look at the insane amount of inexperience on this team. To play like this with all that against the team? You can disagree but damn does that look good to me...way better than 03 or 06 or 09.
What I want
is simply to follow a formula, that to this date, is far and away the best route to success. So please stop trying to pass off what "I" want as some sort of radical nonsense. And it's not what "I" want.
It's what many others want, as well. But of course you won't quote those posts, just mine. Again,
"there's plenty of talent here" means absolutely nothing, because obviously, there isn't as much talent here as there is on other teams. If there was, we'd be doing a lot better.
I wonder if you honestly believe this stuff sometimes. i'm referring to you accussing me of accussing you of "radical nonsense". Lol where did I imply you were radical or spouting nonsense? I didn't. But we all know what's really going on here. Sting doesn't wanna be wrong ever...don't forget Stepan's season is disappointing. WHat bearing does the same exact opinion froma different poster have on our debate? it has none. Other people share MY opinion. That doesn't mean anything. Address me and stop dancing in circles b/c you have no response.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by JimmyStart*