View Single Post
02-29-2004, 06:27 PM
Registered User
Edge's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Amish Paradise
Country: United States
Posts: 13,380
vCash: 500
1. This isn't a video game. When you jerk a prospect around for two years, he doesnt suddenly start "excelling" the minute you trade him. Any GM and any scout in the league will tell you that. In fact it's taken two years for him to even catch up in development time and start showing something. It's very much like a kids education. If he misses most of third grade, he's not gonna suddenly pick it up be going to another school and being in 4th grade. It's gonna take a lot of catch up time and even then it isnt a sure thing. These guys in the NHL are the best hockey players in the world, a kid who essentially missed the better parts of two seasons in NY is not suddenly going to go somewhere be "okay".

2. 11 minutes of icetime with 4th line wingers. Name me ANY other rookie who has made a contribution with the guys lundmark has been paired with. Numbers are also misleading, having played hockey i can tell you that if you sit for 45 minutes straight and then suddenly get thrown on the ice you're not gonna be too sharp. If you've played hockey you too would know that. Now let me pose another question to you, if eric lindros couldnt spark the 4th line and score with those guys and he is a guy who {despite his flaws and injuries} is still a vetern and still capable of 70 some odd pointes, how in god's name do you expect Jamie Lundmark to show anything with them?

3. Ortmeyer and Lacouture are two very hard working guys, and they are also two guys who really cant score and likely will never be scorers. The only difference between the two is that Lac fights and Ortmeyer doesn't. If you used that reasonined with ANY scout or player perssonel person in the league it would laughed right out of the office.

Bottom line is that EVERY person I've talked to and their colleagues think the rangers approach is the worst in the leaue and the results go on to back that up. The results from their rookies, the results from their team and the results of their "development". From Malhotra to Blackburn to Lundmark, this team has not developed a prospect since Mike York back in 2000, which is already 4 years ago and you could argue that he was developed by a strong program at michigan state and not the rangers or their minor league affiliate. This teams history goes further back than any of our current prospects. This goes back to Christian Dube and Stefan Cherneski, Mattias Norstrom and Eric Cairns none of which were given time to development or rewarded for their hard work.

Now you are entitled to your opinion but there isnt one person working in the NHL today (outside those associated with the rangers either present or past 7 years) who would agree with you, and i'd bet a years salary on that. And there's also a slim percent who'd agree with that on these boards. The rangers history speaks for itself. if it were a court case, it'd be open and shut. if it were a multiple choice question, it'd be a no brainer.

The Rangers have no one to blame but themselves. now if this were one or two prospects the argument you have would make more sense, but this crap has been going on even before sather, for the past 8 years. Sather has certainly taken it to a new level though. There are going to be legit busts along the way {Brendl, Jeff Brown} but the team doesnt need to help it along by creating their own busts.

Edge is offline