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

Rangers now team of one

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-06-2003, 03:16 AM
  #1
KING
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,776
vCash: 500
Rangers now team of one

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/ho...p-111261c.html

KING is offline  
Old
10-06-2003, 04:44 AM
  #2
JCProdigy
Registered User
 
JCProdigy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: I want what I want
Posts: 1,232
vCash: 500
I guess everybody will say, "I'll believe it when I see it" but what else can you expect. It's nice to hear them say and do what they should have been doing since Sather took over but hopefully the on ice results will mirror their off ice banter.

Quote:
A strong start: After a season-opening trip to Minnesota and Columbus, the Rangers play 11-of-13 at home. Fail to take advantage and they're almost surely sunk.
I still think that this team will have some growing pains in the beginning of the season but that point is true. If they don't gain some sort of confidence then all could be abandoned on yet another dismal season.

Question becomes how many games do you give them before you truly judge what kind of team they are/will be?

JCProdigy is offline  
Old
10-06-2003, 05:10 AM
  #3
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
Until the end of November...

by then, kinks should be worked out and this team will either suck again, or will be operating on a few cylinders. If they can't get it together by then, I would seriously doubt that they'd ever.

Fletch is offline  
Old
10-06-2003, 05:22 AM
  #4
AJ1982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: New York
Posts: 1,812
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to AJ1982
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch
by then, kinks should be worked out and this team will either suck again, or will be operating on a few cylinders. If they can't get it together by then, I would seriously doubt that they'd ever.
Personally, I think they have to experience some meaningful measure of success within the first 10 games. After so many years of disappointment it is key to come out with a good start so they don't revert back into old habits.

AJ1982 is offline  
Old
10-06-2003, 05:28 AM
  #5
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
It would be nice...

to get things going in the first 10 games, but I'm willing to give them more time. Heck, didn't they start slow in '93 before going on a tear in November/December? I'm pretty excited for things to get started already.

Fletch is offline  
Old
10-06-2003, 05:50 AM
  #6
JCProdigy
Registered User
 
JCProdigy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: I want what I want
Posts: 1,232
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch
to get things going in the first 10 games, but I'm willing to give them more time. Heck, didn't they start slow in '93 before going on a tear in November/December? I'm pretty excited for things to get started already.
Yep, they sure did, losing their first four games I think. Still that was a much better team in a much different situation.

I'm inclined to think that Nov. 16 will be the date that I'm eyeing towards. They play the devils in the afternoon on the 15th and it will be 15 games into the season. Like I said I'm expecting growing pains so the Rangers are gonna need a little luck to go their way in order to gain enough confidence to be a successful team this year. Unfortunately luck is usually not on their side.

JCProdigy is offline  
Old
10-06-2003, 06:04 AM
  #7
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
I should clarify something...

I wasn't intending to compare this team to '93-94 in terms of where it can go, but I do believe it make take some time to get things to click, especially if this team is really going to play some sort of system. Some lines are new, roles may actually be defined, so it may take some time to gel.

Fletch is offline  
Old
10-06-2003, 07:59 AM
  #8
Av-merican
@Av_merican
 
Av-merican's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: The Frozen Wasteland
Country: Scotland
Posts: 12,306
vCash: 500
Not to get into any Ranger-bashing here, but when has Sather had any discernible system of any kind? Even in his Edmonton days, he emphasized offense and treated defense as secondary--exactly the thing the Rangers shouldn't be doing. The Oilers got away with it because the NHL of the 80s was all about offense and they had Fuhr and Ranford minding the net. Times have changed.

I'm not advocating the Rangers employ a full-on trap, but they have to show some kind of defensive accountability. So far the kinds of players they have and the kind of coach they have aren't willing to do that.

Av-merican is offline  
Old
10-06-2003, 08:06 AM
  #9
Davisian
Registered User
 
Davisian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Broomfield, CO
Posts: 6,079
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Av-merican
Not to get into any Ranger-bashing here, but when has Sather had any discernible system of any kind?

So far the kinds of players they have and the kind of coach they have aren't willing to do that.
Well that was the whole point of the article, that now they're paying attention to the details of employing a more systematic approach to defense, and they brought Renney out of the office and onto the ice to direct the practices as such..

Sather's still the coach, but Renney's instituting the system..

Of course, we're all still skeptical (Tom Renney as a Ranger savior?, I mean come on!), but at least now it looks like they're admitting that the old way doesn't work and a defensive system is needed.. Might not work out, but before they were simply saying "There's nothing wrong with the system, its the execution.."

Davisian is offline  
Old
10-06-2003, 08:11 AM
  #10
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
That's the point Av...

supposedly, there is a system in place. Supposedly things are different now compared to last season. I don't think they need to employ a trap, but they do need to be accountable, and supposedly that's what's going on right now. So we'll see, no one's currently convinced.

Fletch is offline  
Old
10-06-2003, 08:11 AM
  #11
MisterUnspoken
Vintage
 
MisterUnspoken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 10,132
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to MisterUnspoken
Quote:
Originally Posted by Av-merican
Not to get into any Ranger-bashing here, but when has Sather had any discernible system of any kind? Even in his Edmonton days, he emphasized offense and treated defense as secondary--exactly the thing the Rangers shouldn't be doing. The Oilers got away with it because the NHL of the 80s was all about offense and they had Fuhr and Ranford minding the net. Times have changed.

I'm not advocating the Rangers employ a full-on trap, but they have to show some kind of defensive accountability. So far the kinds of players they have and the kind of coach they have aren't willing to do that.

its rather evident you havent been following the Rangers this pre-season. Sather doesnt control the 'systems', Renney does, and he has installed them.

All it is now is a matter of execution. You will see a much more solid defensive team overall this season. Im not as pessimistic as most people here, so I firmly believe this 'system' that is being instituted will be effective, at least more so than anything we had the previous six seasons

MisterUnspoken is offline  
Old
10-06-2003, 10:31 AM
  #12
Av-merican
@Av_merican
 
Av-merican's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: The Frozen Wasteland
Country: Scotland
Posts: 12,306
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterUnspoken
its rather evident you havent been following the Rangers this pre-season. Sather doesnt control the 'systems', Renney does, and he has installed them.

All it is now is a matter of execution. You will see a much more solid defensive team overall this season. Im not as pessimistic as most people here, so I firmly believe this 'system' that is being instituted will be effective, at least more so than anything we had the previous six seasons
Well, while admittedly I haven't actually SEEN the Rangers in person or on television, they ended the preseason on a 5-4 mark. Preseason or no preseason, that's not very impressive. And from what I've read from the papers and heard from other Ranger fans is that this team doesn't look much different than the Rangers teams of times past. Sure, maybe they're showing slightly more defensive accountability, but that's not saying much. I believe they managed to blow a 2-goal lead in a minute's time, did they not? That sounds like some terrible defense to me.

And really, Renney can try and institute all the systems he wants. Until I see Sather hold players accountable, I'll keep my optimism in check. Sather hasn't shown that he can or he is willing to hold these players responsible, even though he controls their contracts.

This is just meant to spur discussion, and not to try and burst your bubble of optimism. As a fan you of course have that right.

Av-merican is offline  
Old
10-06-2003, 10:41 AM
  #13
Davisian
Registered User
 
Davisian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Broomfield, CO
Posts: 6,079
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Av-merican
And really, Renney can try and institute all the systems he wants. Until I see Sather hold players accountable, I'll keep my optimism in check.
Welcome to our world..

Davisian is offline  
Old
10-06-2003, 12:10 PM
  #14
Jim Ramsay
Registered User
 
Jim Ramsay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Warwick, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 529
vCash: 500
While a 5-4 record may not be anything to be impressed about remember that it was pre-season and the roster you're goin to see during the season didn't even play one game together because prospects were in and different line combos were used then the ones goin to be used this season.

Jim Ramsay is offline  
Old
10-06-2003, 02:03 PM
  #15
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
Point is taken and understood, Av...

but I don't think it only takes a month (actually somewhat less) to right everything that this team has learned that is wrong. There still needs to be work done but if management is committed to the task, and the players become committed (and it seems as though system has become a buzzword this preseason) then perhaps in time all will work out. Yeah, 5-4 isn't great, but who knows, could the last two games (road games in which 1 goal was gievn up including giving up less than 20 shots to the Devils, in Jersey, against most of their starters) be an indication that things may be coming together? Who knows, but I'm willing to see what the next month or so brings.

Fletch is offline  
Old
10-06-2003, 09:10 PM
  #16
shmekel
Registered User
 
shmekel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Section 402
Country: United States
Posts: 686
vCash: 500
Av-Merican . . .

5-4 in the preseason? Big whoop.
Detroit was 2-6. Do you think they're not going to make the playoffs this year? Come on now.

That said, the last couple of preseason games are the most telling, as teams will be playing most, if not all of the upcoming players/ line combos. I'd say it was somewhat encouraging. No more, no less.

shmekel is offline  
Old
10-07-2003, 04:21 AM
  #17
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,479
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Av-merican
they ended the preseason on a 5-4 mark. Preseason or no preseason, that's not very impressive.
When was the last time ANYTHING could be based on preseason? The 'Wings are 2 & 6. Want to write them off? The Devs preseason record is not much different than than ours....want to write them off as well? OR how about the unbeated Isles? Should they just be handed the 'Cup based upon preseason?

Here's the thing with the way the season starts. IT is a fact that the Rangers ALWAYS start slowly. Especially in the first 5 games or so. But I don't know if they can afford to do so this year. With so many early games at home, it is VERY important that they get off to a good start. Add that to the fact that the first 10 games are played against Minny, Columbus, Atlanta, Carolina, Florida, Detroit, Anaheim, Carolina, Montreal, & Colarodo. Now I know that there are some real tough games here. However there are also more than a few "winnable" games here. Especially when you are playing at home. Yes, I know that some of these teams the Ragners took lightly in the previous years. And that is something that has ALWAYS come back to bite us in the rear-end. However, there are more than enough games here that the Rangers SHOULD do well in. Unlike in the prior years, I do not think that we can be lax in our evaluation of the team early on. If this team is indeed FINALLY serious and are willing to play every game, given the quality of the teams that we are going to be playing and the amount of home games, there is NO WAY that this team can emerge from the first 10 games w/ a loosing record. Minny is w/o Gabby, Columbus should still be on the outside of the playoffs this year, Atlanta is a mess right now, Carolina & Florida are Carolina & Florida, and Montreal should not be a better team. Anything less than a 6-4 record will not be an ecouraging sign after the first 10 games.
Yes, I think that it will take a little time for Sather's new so-called "system" to be properly executed, however not to at least 6 of those first 10 games will not be the sign of a playoff team.

True Blue 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 08:48 PM.

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.