View Single Post
Old
02-14-2012, 09:03 AM
  #38
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 14,750
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by drewcon40 View Post
BRB - I agree with you that Sather was given a lot...and I mean A LOT of time to get the team to this point. However, Sather's era has to be split where you look at the pre-lock out and post lock out NHL. Now I don't have any sources so this purely speculative on my part but I always thought it was interesting timing on when the Rangers decided on the purge of Spring 2004. As fans, a lockout seemed likely but never did I think an entire NHL season was to be lost. Sather is part of the old boys club it seems. He may have known that the NHL landscape was about to change. Thus, prior to the lockout, when there wasn't a cap, Sather brought in the available talent (albeit damaged goods). His Jagr trade was curious. Anson Carter straight up? The Rangers basically had a bargain on their hands as Jagr should have been the MVP in 2005-06. Shanahan signs and the emergence of Henrik. Sean Avery part 1 was a success. I think Sather thought he could get a cup run by bringing in Drury and Gomez. (Although I liked Nylander and Cullen). If some of you have better memories, Jagr had a clause in his contract that appeared to be an easy incentive to reach but he never did. Prior to 2008-09, he left for the KHL and Avery signed with Dallas. This is where Sather set back a bit. Besides the existing, long term deals to Gomez and Drury, he spent a boatload for Redden.

I am re-reading my post...I don't think I have a point???
No, I understand...and a lot of people do like to break it up between pre and post-lockout Sather...and label it bad vs. good. The bolded part is why the immediate years after the lockout were not much of a success. Those were terrible decisons, perhaps worse than any decision he made pre-lockout. Difference is, he had Lundqvist around to mask them a bit.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline   Reply With Quote