HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Sather's off-season - impressive

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-23-2010, 09:51 PM
  #826
dedalus
Registered User
 
dedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,215
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NikC View Post
So now I’m a “Sather apologist”
When you try to reinvent the language to suit your argument, you are adopting the methods of the Sather apologist. Your intention may not be to justify the guy's tenure, but you are offering the same arguments apologists make. Therefore, you should not be surprised if people see you thus.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NikC View Post
for you to demonize and ridicule
Does this strike you funny when you've twice sarcastically noted my "brilliance"?

When you've written this: "So that you can prove you’re part of the elite class fanbase?"

Or this: "You can be a miserable, complaining NY sports fan who’s always owed something."

Know thyself, friend. Know thyself.

And stop playing the victim when your own aggression turns on you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NikC View Post
It’s not changing words to fit an agenda ... it’s a rebuild while staying competitive.
LOL. Once you have offered the phrase "staying competitive" you have changed the meaning of "rebuild." You know this yourself which is why you wrote: "It’s not a rebuild in the traditional sense."

The qualifier is in your own statement..

Quote:
Originally Posted by NikC View Post
What do you call Anisimov, DElZotto, Gilroy, being added to a young core of Staal, Girardi, Dubinsky, Callahan, Ludqvist?
How about adding McDonoagh and maybe Grachev this year? Nonsense? We’re one of the youngest teams in the NHL, but we’re
Still doing all the same things we did pre lockout?
Tell you what. I will do you the courtesy of answering your questions when you do me the courtesy of answering mine, at least one of which I've already posed twice:

1. Is Sather a "golden" GM? Has his track record proven he is "golden"?
2. Given all of what you write about other teams likely using the same methods as Sather and given the fact that "there is no magic GM or formula that would miraculously turnaround this squad as currently configured," how should we approach an evaluation of Glen Sather? Should we throw his ass on the street tomorrow morning?
3. When you see Zach Parise playing for the Devils, do you understand why the pre-lockout years are not "dead and gone"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by NikC View Post
Sorry we aren’t icing a team of AHL nobodys, so that you can feel more comfortable about it.
Wow. Where did THIS come from?


Last edited by dedalus: 08-24-2010 at 09:15 AM.
dedalus is offline  
Old
08-24-2010, 08:10 AM
  #827
Jersey Girl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,958
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldStanley View Post
At this point in time the results are rather discouraging.

However the Rangers are tied with Toronto, Long Island, Buffalo, Tampa and Carolina for playoff appearances since Sather has been the GM of the Rangers.This would put them in a tie for 17th best.

As far as tie breakers, I'd use advancing in the playoffs. Carolina and Tampa both won cups during this time period. Buffalo beat the Rangers and have advanced more so than the Rangers.Toronto has also advanced to the Conference Finals during this time period. The only other club with 4 appearances who has found less success in the playoffs is the Islanders who lost in the first round in all 4 of those years. To be fair, even know Chicago won the cup this year, they have only has 3 playoff appearances to this point, so they still rank behind the Rangers.

With all that considered, I'd put the Rangers in 21st place in terms of success, if one views success as making the playoffs and advancing in them.
And so we can wrap up the debate regarding how we define success into this one sentence. An argument is being made that the Rangers rank above the current Stanley Cup champions during Glen Sather's tenure.

I'm just going to respectfully, vehemently, disagree.

Jersey Girl is offline  
Old
08-24-2010, 09:28 AM
  #828
dedalus
Registered User
 
dedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,215
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldStanley View Post
At this point in time the results are rather discouraging.
Obviously I agree.

Quote:
Originally Posted by OldStanley View Post
Chicago won the cup this year, they have only has 3 playoff appearances to this point, so they still rank behind the Rangers.

With all that considered, I'd put the Rangers in 21st place in terms of success, if one views success as making the playoffs and advancing in them.
Hmmm ... personally I'd say winning a championship trumps the one extra playoff appearance. I think the vast majority of fans, players, coaches, and managers would agree with me on this, meaning they woula all sacrifice a playoff appearance for a championship.

If we're going to honestly judge the team against others, I think it's fair to include the Rangers' resources as part of the equation. The Isles may have only the same number of appearances, but they've had nowhere near the financial resources the Rangers have. Likewise Minnesota, Phoenix, Edmonton, Atlanta, Florida, Columbus, Buffalo, and Tampa.

Before the lockout, Sather had the option to spend WELL past any of these teams in the pursuit of talent.

Since the lockout, Sather has had the ability to buy his way out of unfortunate contracts. (None of the teams above, for instance, could ever afford to pay Wade Redden to play in the AHL.) Likewise, the Blueshirts are able to invest huge amounts of money into scouting and development. Sather has had a massive advantage over almost all his competitors, and yet his level of success has been amongst the worst.

It seems to me this would push him down from the 21st position you have him at.


Last edited by dedalus: 08-24-2010 at 09:34 AM.
dedalus is offline  
Old
08-24-2010, 09:40 AM
  #829
Edge
Kris King's Ghost
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Amish Paradise
Country: United States
Posts: 13,860
vCash: 500
I'm going to go with dedalus on this one.

A cup trumps making the playoffs.

No way around it.

Edge is offline  
Old
08-24-2010, 09:53 AM
  #830
Jersey Girl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,958
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
I'm going to go with dedalus on this one.

A cup trumps making the playoffs.

No way around it.
I said it first!!!

Jersey Girl is offline  
Old
08-24-2010, 10:08 AM
  #831
Edge
Kris King's Ghost
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Amish Paradise
Country: United States
Posts: 13,860
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jersey Girl View Post
I said it first!!!
Okay you both get to ride in the front seats of the car.

If you need me, I'll be snoozing in the back.

Edge is offline  
Old
08-24-2010, 10:09 AM
  #832
OldStanley
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 103
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jersey Girl View Post
And so we can wrap up the debate regarding how we define success into this one sentence. An argument is being made that the Rangers rank above the current Stanley Cup champions during Glen Sather's tenure.

I'm just going to respectfully, vehemently, disagree.
It depends on how you rank them.

If you go by making the playoffs as the first determination, The Rangers have made the playoffs more than Chicago has over the past tens years since Sather has been the Rangers GM. This ranking does not take into consideration who is better right now, it is based on who has been the better teams in terms of making the playoffs over the past ten years.

If you define success as just winning the Stanley cup, which you are more than welcome to, it leaves most of the teams tied at zero. Perhaps you could use a weighted system where Cups count more.

All the same the overall point it, under Sather's tenure, almost every other team has done better than the Rangers at first off making the post season and secondly advancing in the playoffs once there.

OldStanley is offline  
Old
08-24-2010, 10:35 AM
  #833
OldStanley
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 103
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dedalus View Post
Obviously I agree.


Hmmm ... personally I'd say winning a championship trumps the one extra playoff appearance. I think the vast majority of fans, players, coaches, and managers would agree with me on this, meaning they woula all sacrifice a playoff appearance for a championship.

If we're going to honestly judge the team against others, I think it's fair to include the Rangers' resources as part of the equation. The Isles may have only the same number of appearances, but they've had nowhere near the financial resources the Rangers have. Likewise Minnesota, Phoenix, Edmonton, Atlanta, Florida, Columbus, Buffalo, and Tampa.

Before the lockout, Sather had the option to spend WELL past any of these teams in the pursuit of talent.

Since the lockout, Sather has had the ability to buy his way out of unfortunate contracts. (None of the teams above, for instance, could ever afford to pay Wade Redden to play in the AHL.) Likewise, the Blueshirts are able to invest huge amounts of money into scouting and development. Sather has had a massive advantage over almost all his competitors, and yet his level of success has been amongst the worst.

It seems to me this would push him down from the 21st position you have him at.
I do not disagree and really I was just looking for a way to rank the all the teams in the NHL while Sather has been GM.

Every team has it's own unique set of circumstances, however all of them compete for the same thing every year.

How would you guys define success over a time period of ten years? Is there a way to define success without including circumstantial evidence?

OldStanley is offline  
Old
08-24-2010, 11:21 AM
  #834
dedalus
Registered User
 
dedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,215
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldStanley View Post
How would you guys define success over a time period of ten years?
Oh I think your criteria are perfect.

Every team will tell you its goal is to win a championship. That's why you draft; that's why you trade; that's why you sign free agents; that's why you change management and coaching personnel. Given these things, making the playoffs seems the perfect basic measuring stick. Advancing in the playoffs further hones the evaluation.

After that, though, I think one can nuance the evaluation further by factoring in elements like finances.

dedalus is offline  
Old
08-24-2010, 12:09 PM
  #835
GAGLine
HFBoards Sponsor
 
GAGLine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,092
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dedalus View Post
Oh I think your criteria are perfect.
I think his criteria was good, but I've got a simpler one:

Slightly more than half the teams in the league make the playoffs (16 out of 30)
We've made the playoffs slightly less than half the time Sather has been here (4 out of 9)

Based on that, it must be concluded that Sather has been below average during his tenure. Below average isn't going to get it done.

GAGLine is offline  
Old
08-24-2010, 12:10 PM
  #836
HockeyBurd*
 
HockeyBurd*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,579
vCash: 500
Success for Dolan = making money. Sather has been very successful.

Success for fans (i.e. hockey success) = winning a cup (and by correlation, decremental degrees of success being judged by distances from achieving this goal). Sather has been a complete failure. Any success granted to him is based on a fantasy game. Meaning that the person making his case will say, "oh, we're 2 or 3 years away. Just look at the roster and the farm system bla bla bla." or "The Flyers went to the finals and the only thing that seperated them and the Rangers was a single shootout." or some other similar type of nonsense.

And you can see it all over this thread. The way some people judge "impressive"... well, clearly their standards have been lowered by Sather himself. But the only way you can grant Sather any level of "success" would be by the same logic with which you grant him being "impressive" this off season. In other words, he is impressive because he hasn't screwed up the way he has in the past. Or he is impressive because he undid mistakes of the past. etc. He is successful because he made the playoffs 4 seasons out of 5 after having missed 4 seasons. etc.

HockeyBurd* is offline  
Old
08-24-2010, 12:32 PM
  #837
NikC
Registered User
 
NikC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 3,818
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dedalus View Post
When you try to reinvent the language to suit your argument, you are adopting the methods of the Sather apologist. Your intention may not be to justify the guy's tenure, but you are offering the same arguments apologists make. Therefore, you should not be surprised if people see you thus.

reinvent language? No. merely stating what our GM said about this transition period
for the NYR. Competitive while Rebuilding. Didnít reinvent anything. Those are his
words. Iím merely stating that he has kept his word and has been incorporating elements
of both. You disagree and say itís not a traditional rebuild. Itís not. Nothing more to say here for me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dedalus View Post
LOL. Once you have offered the phrase "staying competitive" you have changed the meaning of "rebuild." You know this yourself which is why you wrote: "Itís not a rebuild in the traditional sense."

The qualifier is in your own statement..
These are Sathers words, not mine,again Iím just reaffirming them. You cannot accept it.
Ok, fine, but itís reality, and itís actually happening.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dedalus View Post
Tell you what. I will do you the courtesy of answering your questions when you do me the courtesy of answering mine, at least one of which I've already posed twice:

1. Is Sather a "golden" GM? Has his track record proven he is "golden"?
2. Given all of what you write about other teams likely using the same methods as Sather and given the fact that "there is no magic GM or formula that would miraculously turnaround this squad as currently configured," how should we approach an evaluation of Glen Sather? Should we throw his ass on the street tomorrow morning?
3. When you see Zach Parise playing for the Devils, do you understand why the pre-lockout years are not "dead and gone"?
?

1. Obviously not.
2. start a new thread about evaluating Sather, Iím here to comment on the OP.
3. Parise was drafted in 03í.

Itís obvious we donít agree. We are at an impasse here. Read past posts if you want to know what I think about the matter as a whole. When you donít take the time to read
What someone has posted earlier it gives them little incentive to continue any dialogue with you. Iíve stated my position several times.

NikC is offline  
Old
08-24-2010, 12:52 PM
  #838
OldStanley
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 103
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyBurd View Post
Success for Dolan = making money. Sather has been very successful.
If only Dolan/Ownership could see that more money could be made if the Rangers were successful by the fan's definition.

Another strange thing seems to be, I have not been able to look into this theory yet so it's pure conjecture but... The Rangers throughout their whole history, regardless of the owner or the GM or the coach or whatever, seem to be below average in terms of making the playoffs and advancing in them. I wonder if there are market conditions or some sort of underlying factors to this.

OldStanley is offline  
Old
08-24-2010, 12:55 PM
  #839
TomLaidlaw
Registered User
 
TomLaidlaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Transylvania
Country: Romania
Posts: 3,200
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldStanley View Post
If only Dolan/Ownership could see that more money could be made if the Rangers were successful by the fan's definition.

Another strange thing seems to be, I have not been able to look into this theory yet so it's pure conjecture but... The Rangers throughout their whole history, regardless of the owner or the GM or the coach or whatever, seem to be below average in terms of making the playoffs and advancing in them. I wonder if there are market conditions or some sort of underlying factors to this.
Lack of good hockey players

TomLaidlaw is offline  
Old
08-24-2010, 01:00 PM
  #840
TomLaidlaw
Registered User
 
TomLaidlaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Transylvania
Country: Romania
Posts: 3,200
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyBurd View Post
Success for Dolan = making money. Sather has been very successful.

Success for fans (i.e. hockey success) = winning a cup (and by correlation, decremental degrees of success being judged by distances from achieving this goal). Sather has been a complete failure. Any success granted to him is based on a fantasy game. Meaning that the person making his case will say, "oh, we're 2 or 3 years away. Just look at the roster and the farm system bla bla bla." or "The Flyers went to the finals and the only thing that seperated them and the Rangers was a single shootout." or some other similar type of nonsense.

And you can see it all over this thread. The way some people judge "impressive"... well, clearly their standards have been lowered by Sather himself. But the only way you can grant Sather any level of "success" would be by the same logic with which you grant him being "impressive" this off season. In other words, he is impressive because he hasn't screwed up the way he has in the past. Or he is impressive because he undid mistakes of the past. etc. He is successful because he made the playoffs 4 seasons out of 5 after having missed 4 seasons. etc.
Well said Burd. I have said this before and still believe it is Stockholm syndrome. The fans have been under Sather's reign for so long that they have started to sympathize with their captor. All that is left is putting on a beret and robbing the bank like Patty Hearst.

TomLaidlaw is offline  
Old
08-24-2010, 01:04 PM
  #841
Shadowtron
Registered User
 
Shadowtron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,534
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NikC View Post

3. Parise was drafted in 03’.
These drafts aren't one-offs, exclusive only to the year in which they occur They have implications going forward. Instead of having a 25 year old 35 goal scorer manning our 1st or 2nd lines, we have future consideration from Nashville (i.e. nada). Obviously there's going to come a point where it's no longer a factor. But today, the hole is still there.

Shadowtron is offline  
Old
08-24-2010, 01:09 PM
  #842
MSG the place to be*
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,783
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyBurd View Post
Success for Dolan = making money. Sather has been very successful.

Success for fans (i.e. hockey success) = winning a cup (and by correlation, decremental degrees of success being judged by distances from achieving this goal). Sather has been a complete failure. Any success granted to him is based on a fantasy game. Meaning that the person making his case will say, "oh, we're 2 or 3 years away. Just look at the roster and the farm system bla bla bla." or "The Flyers went to the finals and the only thing that seperated them and the Rangers was a single shootout." or some other similar type of nonsense.

And you can see it all over this thread. The way some people judge "impressive"... well, clearly their standards have been lowered by Sather himself. But the only way you can grant Sather any level of "success" would be by the same logic with which you grant him being "impressive" this off season. In other words, he is impressive because he hasn't screwed up the way he has in the past. Or he is impressive because he undid mistakes of the past. etc. He is successful because he made the playoffs 4 seasons out of 5 after having missed 4 seasons. etc.
If Sather was operating at the cap floor and we had these results than I could see where you were coming from but we spend at the max and have medicore results. Not to mention Dolan is about to be served a $26 million plate to eat. Unless Dolan is opposed to making MORE money than I dont really understand this thought process.


Last edited by MSG the place to be*: 08-24-2010 at 01:20 PM.
MSG the place to be* is offline  
Old
08-24-2010, 01:15 PM
  #843
OldStanley
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 103
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomLaidlaw View Post
Lack of good hockey players
I'm sure that has something to do with it.

OldStanley is offline  
Old
08-24-2010, 01:20 PM
  #844
OldStanley
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 103
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSG the place to be View Post
If Sather was operating at the cap floor and we had these results than I could see where you were coming from but we spend at the max and have medicore results. Not to mention Dolan is about to eat be served a $26 million plate to eat. Unless Dolan is opposed to making MORE money than I dont really understand this thought process.
With the salary cap and the buyout rules and the not trading cash for players, The Rangers probably have far fewer expenses than they used to. Perhaps they see this as Sather saving them money instead of realizing these are the rules now?

OldStanley is offline  
Old
08-24-2010, 01:25 PM
  #845
MSG the place to be*
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,783
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldStanley View Post
With the salary cap and the buyout rules and the not trading cash for players, The Rangers probably have far fewer expenses than they used to. Perhaps they see this as Sather saving them money instead of realizing these are the rules now?
SERENITY NOWWWWWWWWW.

MSG the place to be* is offline  
Old
08-24-2010, 01:27 PM
  #846
HockeyBurd*
 
HockeyBurd*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,579
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSG the place to be View Post
If Sather was operating at the cap floor and we had these results than I could see where you were coming from but we spend at the max and have medicore results. Not to mention Dolan is about to eat be served a $26 million plate to eat. Unless Dolan is opposed to making MORE money than I dont really understand this thought process.
In realizing that ownership is aware of what it means to make less money, things should come into better perspective. Realizing they understand a decrease in ticket sales, loss of playoff revenue, marketing failures, etc. They have a business model built on acceptable loss (for elevated future gains) vs expected minimal revenue. Perhaps Sather has conditioned ownership with a certain level of "success" that he has been able to condition some fans with.

HockeyBurd* is offline  
Old
08-24-2010, 02:07 PM
  #847
dedalus
Registered User
 
dedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,215
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NikC View Post
reinvent language? No. merely stating what our GM said about this transition period
for the NYR.
Really? Glen Sather has called this a "non-traditional rebuild"?

Since I have utterly no memory of such language, I'm asking you to find a quote.

Not that it matters. If you want to say Glen Sather is redefining "rebuild," that's okay with me. You have adopted and offered the party line as your own, therefore it is your own.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NikC View Post
You disagree and say itís not a traditional rebuild.
LOL. You're mistaken, friend. YOU say it's "not a traditional rebuild."

Everyone else who is not drinking the organizational Kool-Aid says it's not a rebuild.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NikC View Post
1. Obviously not. [Sather is not a golden GM.]
Very well then. It's rather ridiculous to assert what a "golden" GM would accomplish when you acknowledge off the bat that Sather doesn't meet such a standard, wouldn't you agree?

Quote:
Originally Posted by NikC View Post
2. start a new thread about evaluating Sather, Iím here to comment on the OP.
Done. I look forward to your contribution. Here's the link:
http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?p...9#post27508349

Quote:
Originally Posted by NikC View Post
3. Parise was drafted in 03í.
I know that already. Thank you, but you have not answered my question. With the understanding that Parise was drafted before the lockout, and that the Devils have his services while the Rangers do not, do you understand why the pre-lockout years are not "dead and gone"?

This is a simple yes/no question: "Yes I understand" or "No I do not understand."

Quote:
Originally Posted by NikC View Post
When you donít take the time to read
What someone has posted earlier it gives them little incentive to continue any dialogue with you. Iíve stated my position several times.
LOL. I believe I've written that before. Oh yes. To you.

dedalus is offline  
Old
08-24-2010, 02:10 PM
  #848
dedalus
Registered User
 
dedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,215
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
If you need me, I'll be snoozing in the back.
Don't you snore, like, REALLY loud?

dedalus is offline  
Old
08-24-2010, 02:13 PM
  #849
dedalus
Registered User
 
dedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,215
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomLaidlaw View Post
Well said Burd. I have said this before and still believe it is Stockholm syndrome. The fans have been under Sather's reign for so long that they have started to sympathize with their captor. All that is left is putting on a beret and robbing the bank like Patty Hearst.
In the five years after Smith, it was easily understood. Almost ANYTHING could look good after the train wreck of the late nineties.

A decade in though?

dedalus is offline  
Old
08-24-2010, 02:45 PM
  #850
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 30,634
vCash: 500
Awards:
We have asked people to not get personal. That's not happening. There's nothing new here at this point. We're done.

__________________
SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:06 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.