View Single Post
Old
12-13-2013, 10:04 AM
  #58
Synergy27
Registered User
 
Synergy27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Country: United States
Posts: 4,744
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangersHank View Post
What about 11-12? That team didnt suck, were they distracted? Or is this thread just another crazy thought after another horrible game?

This team doesnt have enough talent. If the city distracts them, trade them.
This post was meant to be the exact opposite of that. This is something I've been thinking about for a very long time and is in no way driven by the current team. The Rangers have basically always been bad, and while it makes sense that they had a hard time competing in the pre-expansion era, it seems to me as though there is probably an extra factor (on top of the obvious poor management, which, by the way, is a variable in the long term, not a constant) CONTRIBUTING TO, not directly responsible for, it.

The reason why I am bringing this up now is because I think the team needs to be careful in its approach to rebuilding if they ever decide to finally commit to one. It might not be a good idea to dump all of the vets and bring in a bunch of kids and draft picks who might not be mentally equipped to rise above the pressures and temptations of the big city. The team that finally won in 1994 basically dumped all of its talented youth for vets that were driven to win one last time, and it was obviously captained by a very strong, intimidating personality. That team also seemed to have learned from the off-ice mistakes that derailed the previous couple of seasons.

Believe me, I am not one prone to simplifying things. I think this is but a factor in a very complex problem.

Synergy27 is offline   Reply With Quote