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 trade Ethan Werek to Phoenix for Oscar Lindberg

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-10-2011, 01:41 PM
  #276
bleedblue94
Registered User
 
bleedblue94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,220
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
That's not the only option. He could have been used as part of a package for an NHLer. He could have been used to move up in the draft. There are plenty of creative ways he could have been used.

Trading him for a lower pick than he was is not good asset management.
by that theory you would have to argue that hypothetically trading high jessiman for getzlaf 4 years ago would have been poor asset management......

no one truly knows what will happen with these young kids. its best guess and not a certainty.

bleedblue94 is offline  
Old
05-10-2011, 01:45 PM
  #277
n8
WAAAAAAA!!!
 
n8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: san francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 7,405
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
That's not the only option. He could have been used as part of a package for an NHLer. He could have been used to move up in the draft. There are plenty of creative ways he could have been used.

Trading him for a lower pick than he was is not good asset management.
why do people always assume there was a trade available when they use this line of defense? At this point, Sanguinetti for Fasth and a 2nd is looking like a favorable deal.

n8 is offline  
Old
05-10-2011, 02:41 PM
  #278
TrollololBoyle
Registered User
 
TrollololBoyle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 2,672
vCash: 500
Why are people still blaming the Rangers for taking Sanguinetti. First of all, other GMs wanted him, so it's not like the Rangers were the only one. Second of all, nobody knew Giroux would turn out the way he did. The pick was fine, the result was not... so what? Hindsight is 20/20 you can't judge on hindsight... and it's not like you know-it-alls knew Grioux would be a good player either...

TrollololBoyle is offline  
Old
05-10-2011, 03:17 PM
  #279
BlueshirtBlitz
Rich Nash
 
BlueshirtBlitz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New York
Posts: 19,022
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
That's not the only option. He could have been used as part of a package for an NHLer. He could have been used to move up in the draft. There are plenty of creative ways he could have been used.

Trading him for a lower pick than he was is not good asset management.
Not good asset management? We got Jesper Fasth and a second rounder. Jesper Fasth was good enough to be on the Swedish National Team before his injury. Sangs is a bust.

BlueshirtBlitz is offline  
Old
05-10-2011, 03:24 PM
  #280
mm11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,139
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by we want cup View Post
We'll see what kind of player Fasth turns into. At this point, seems most likely that if we have a legit shutdown line in the future it would be Boyle and Prust with a replacement for Fedotenko. Hagelin? Maybe in a few years it could be Lindberg with Boyle sliding over to wing? If any of these possibilities come to bear fruit I'd say we could end up with a pretty good shutdown group. And if that's the case, good luck to other teams' top lines fighting through this:

??? - Boyle - Prust
Staal - Girardi
Lundqvist

Yes I have to agree, 6'7 250 LBS Boyle down the middle with two wrecking balls like Prust and Avery to go with a pairing of Staal and quite possibly the undertaker in young 6'4 Mac would be one menacing, angry, huge shutdown unit lead by the best super pest in the NHL these last few years. Avery would totally have teams thrown off sort of like Atlanta faced the rangers a few years back. Avery had Kovalchuk trying to rip his head off forgetting he was being paid to score goals. If I ever saw and elite shut down unit on paper that would be one.

Heck, with Girardi they already are hell to play against. personally I thought Prust and Avery were great in the Caps series as their best forwards and Staal and Girardi were very good themselves. Unfortunately the ranger elite players like Hank and Gabby IMO underperformed against a overated and very very vunerable Caps team. The caps needed to feel some playoff pressure and they would of folded IMO

Then seeing the Caps vrs the lightning in round 2: Roloson, IMO flat out was the best player the entire series and carried an average NHL team past the caps. Roloson has done this before with worse players and worse teams. I cant imagine how good he would be behind that 5 man wall discussed in the begining.

mm11 is offline  
Old
05-10-2011, 03:34 PM
  #281
ColonialsHockey10
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 9,505
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DatsyukSOGoal View Post

SANGUINETTI WAS NOT A MISTAKE PICK. SEVERAL TEAMS WANTED HIM, SO DON'T ACT LIKE THE RANGERS MADE THE WRONG MOVE BY SELECTING HIM. It's called asset management, Sanguinetti's stock was low, and instead of losing out, they tried to get whatever they could to make up for his value.

WEREK WAS NOT A MISTAKE EITHER.



I love this trade
Sanguinetti was a mistake pick, he's a bust....I don't understand what you're trying to communicate here, the fact of the matter is, no matter what other teams thought, the Rangers picked him and it was a wasted pick.

They did get good return for him though, and the same for Werek. Although some fans might not see it that way, Werek was absolutely, positively 100% a mistake pick lol. Any 2nd round player that is 2 years removed from his draft that won't be signed is a mistake according to management, and that's all that matters.

ColonialsHockey10 is online now  
Old
05-10-2011, 03:38 PM
  #282
we want cup
We do not Sow
 
we want cup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Minneapolis
Country: United States
Posts: 10,721
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mm11 View Post
Yes I have to agree, 6'7 250 LBS Boyle down the middle with two wrecking balls like Prust and Avery to go with a pairing of Staal and quite possibly the undertaker in young 6'4 Mac would be one menacing, angry, huge shutdown unit lead by the best super pest in the NHL these last few years. Avery would totally have teams thrown off sort of like Atlanta faced the rangers a few years back. Avery had Kovalchuk trying to rip his head off forgetting he was being paid to score goals. If I ever saw and elite shut down unit on paper that would be one.
It'd be great if Avery would return to that form, but for whatever reason (Torts, his own issues/distractions, increased ref scrutiny, etc.) he's gotten away from it lately.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mm11 View Post
Heck, with Girardi they already are hell to play against. personally I thought Prust and Avery were great in the Caps series as their best forwards and Staal and Girardi were very good themselves. Unfortunately the ranger elite players like Hank and Gabby IMO underperformed against a overated and very very vunerable Caps team. The caps needed to feel some playoff pressure and they would of folded IMO
I'm with you on Gaborik, obviously, but I have to disagree on Henrik. Did he play well enough to steal the series? No. But in 3/5 games he only gave up 2 goals. He kept them alive for a long time in a double OT game, and in game 5 he got beaten once each by 3 of the world's best offensive players, while our ragtag bunch of scrubs put no offensive pressure on Washington. Henrik didn't "underperform" in my book.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mm11 View Post
Then seeing the Caps vrs the lightning in round 2: Roloson, IMO flat out was the best player the entire series and carried an average NHL team past the caps. Roloson has done this before with worse players and worse teams. I cant imagine how good he would be behind that 5 man wall discussed in the begining.
Are you really suggesting that you'd rather have Roloson than Lundqvist? If Henrik was on a team that could sustain any offensive pressure and didn't give up glorious scoring opportunity after glorious scoring opportunity, not to mention deflections and screens, this whole situation would look a lot different.

__________________

RANGERS =
we want cup is offline  
Old
05-10-2011, 03:46 PM
  #283
nyr2k2
Can't Beat Him
 
nyr2k2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 23,726
vCash: 910
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by DatsyukSOGoal View Post
Why are people still blaming the Rangers for taking Sanguinetti. First of all, other GMs wanted him, so it's not like the Rangers were the only one. Second of all, nobody knew Giroux would turn out the way he did. The pick was fine, the result was not... so what? Hindsight is 20/20 you can't judge on hindsight... and it's not like you know-it-alls knew Grioux would be a good player either...
Well, other teams may have wanted him, but WE were the ones that drafted him. On its own, no big deal. It becomes a big deal when it's part of a trend. I'm sure other teams wanted Al Montoya and Hugh Jessiman as well. But we were the team that picked him, and it's part of the continued trend of failed first round picks.

Every team will encounter first round busts from time to time. It just happens. But when almost all of your first round picks prove to be disappointments, it's hard to not be critical.

You're right, no one "knew" Giroux would become the better player. No one can know for certain. But many suspected it. A lot of people preferred Giroux at the time.

__________________

It's just pain.
nyr2k2 is online now  
Old
05-10-2011, 03:54 PM
  #284
JeffMangum
Registered Ab-user
 
JeffMangum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Listening to music
Country: United States
Posts: 57,491
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DatsyukSOGoal View Post
Why are people still blaming the Rangers for taking Sanguinetti. First of all, other GMs wanted him, so it's not like the Rangers were the only one. Second of all, nobody knew Giroux would turn out the way he did. The pick was fine, the result was not... so what? Hindsight is 20/20 you can't judge on hindsight... and it's not like you know-it-alls knew Grioux would be a good player either...
It's still a bad pick. I don't care if other teams wanted him. Other teams probably wanted Jessiman too, and are you going to use that as an excuse for picking him?

__________________
Everything about you is bringing me misery.
JeffMangum is offline  
Old
05-10-2011, 03:55 PM
  #285
wolfgaze
Interesting Cat
 
wolfgaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,138
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nyr2k2 View Post
You're right, no one "knew" Giroux would become the better player. No one can know for certain. But many suspected it. A lot of people preferred Giroux at the time.
Flyers were reportedly ready to draft Sanguinetti. My how that worked out for them.

wolfgaze is offline  
Old
05-10-2011, 04:04 PM
  #286
nyr2k2
Can't Beat Him
 
nyr2k2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 23,726
vCash: 910
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Mastrosimone View Post
It's still a bad pick. I don't care if other teams wanted him. Other teams probably wanted Jessiman too, and are you going to use that as an excuse for picking him?
Exactly. Someone else would have drafted all of our failed first round picks, but who cares? WE took them, and they failed for US. It happens every friggin' draft, and is a problem.

nyr2k2 is online now  
Old
05-10-2011, 04:05 PM
  #287
nyr2k2
Can't Beat Him
 
nyr2k2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 23,726
vCash: 910
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfgaze View Post
Flyers were reportedly ready to draft Sanguinetti. My how that worked out for them.
Yup. I'm sure other GMs breathe a sigh of relief when we draft the player they wanted in round one. It's a signal to them that they were about to draft a bust.

"Well, I guess we dodged a bullet there!"

nyr2k2 is online now  
Old
05-10-2011, 04:09 PM
  #288
we want cup
We do not Sow
 
we want cup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Minneapolis
Country: United States
Posts: 10,721
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nyr2k2 View Post
Yup. I'm sure other GMs breathe a sigh of relief when we draft the player they wanted in round one. It's a signal to them that they were about to draft a bust.

"Well, I guess we dodged a bullet there!"
I can see an interesting Draft Day strategy:

"Pick the players the Rangers are least likely to want now, and most likely to want when they're 30+ and suck."

we want cup is offline  
Old
05-10-2011, 04:32 PM
  #289
Blue Line Monster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 241
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mm11 View Post
Then seeing the Caps vrs the lightning in round 2: Roloson, IMO flat out was the best player the entire series and carried an average NHL team past the caps. Roloson has done this before with worse players and worse teams. I cant imagine how good he would be behind that 5 man wall discussed in the begining.
That average NHL team scored 16 goals in 4 games. The mighty Rangers scored 8 goals in 5 games. Yeah, if only he could play for a team like the Rangers..

Blue Line Monster is offline  
Old
05-10-2011, 04:48 PM
  #290
BlueshirtBlitz
Rich Nash
 
BlueshirtBlitz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New York
Posts: 19,022
vCash: 500
Hank let in one goal in regulation in our first loss.

The second loss we got shutout, again on our offense.

We won game 3 because our offense showed up.

fourth game was ANOTHER OT game and the only game that can be used against Hank.


Game 5 was just meh. Remember, it was essentially a shutout before W2's fluke goal. Hank let in three, but only 2 in the first two periods. Maybe if the offense does something momentum shifts. Who knows. Either way, i don't know why we're talking about Hank.

BlueshirtBlitz is offline  
Old
05-10-2011, 04:49 PM
  #291
JeffMangum
Registered Ab-user
 
JeffMangum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Listening to music
Country: United States
Posts: 57,491
vCash: 500
Hanks actually let in 2, the Semin G was an EN.

JeffMangum is offline  
Old
05-10-2011, 05:12 PM
  #292
xxxZENxxx
Registered User
 
xxxZENxxx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 439
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DatsyukSOGoal View Post
Why are people still blaming the Rangers for taking Sanguinetti. First of all, other GMs wanted him, so it's not like the Rangers were the only one. Second of all, nobody knew Giroux would turn out the way he did. The pick was fine, the result was not... so what? Hindsight is 20/20 you can't judge on hindsight... and it's not like you know-it-alls knew Grioux would be a good player either...
So does everyone realize that John Carlson was taken one pick after Del Zotto? Just adding to the unhappiness.

xxxZENxxx is offline  
Old
05-10-2011, 05:18 PM
  #293
Swept In Seven
Disciple of The Zook
 
Swept In Seven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 9,386
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by xxxZENxxx View Post
So does everyone realize that John Carlson was taken one pick after Del Zotto? Just adding to the unhappiness.
shut up I still like Del Zotto, but i would rather have Carlson in a heartbeat.

Swept In Seven is offline  
Old
05-10-2011, 05:20 PM
  #294
JeffMangum
Registered Ab-user
 
JeffMangum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Listening to music
Country: United States
Posts: 57,491
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by xxxZENxxx View Post
So does everyone realize that John Carlson was taken one pick after Del Zotto? Just adding to the unhappiness.
False!

He was taken 7 picks after DZ. But it still makes me meh.

JeffMangum is offline  
Old
05-10-2011, 05:23 PM
  #295
azrok22
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 9,450
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by xxxZENxxx View Post
So does everyone realize that John Carlson was taken one pick after Del Zotto? Just adding to the unhappiness.
Carlson was the guy that a lot of posters here wanted in that draft.

azrok22 is offline  
Old
05-10-2011, 05:29 PM
  #296
BlueshirtBlitz
Rich Nash
 
BlueshirtBlitz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New York
Posts: 19,022
vCash: 500
And DZ is far from a bust.

But oh no! One bad season with one good season and let's lament the pick!

BlueshirtBlitz is offline  
Old
05-10-2011, 05:31 PM
  #297
broadwayblue
Registered User
 
broadwayblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 15,749
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Mastrosimone View Post
False!

He was taken 7 picks after DZ. But it still makes me meh.
And we know that Carlson will have a better NHL career than MDZ how?

broadwayblue is offline  
Old
05-10-2011, 05:32 PM
  #298
broadwayblue
Registered User
 
broadwayblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 15,749
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueshirtBlitz View Post
And DZ is far from a bust.

But oh no! One bad season with one good season and let's lament the pick!
Yeah, some people sure are quick to render a final verdict. These kids are 20 freaking years old for crying out loud. Unreal.

broadwayblue is offline  
Old
05-10-2011, 05:33 PM
  #299
JeffMangum
Registered Ab-user
 
JeffMangum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Listening to music
Country: United States
Posts: 57,491
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by broadwayblue View Post
And we know that Carlson will have a better NHL career than MDZ how?
I never said whether or not it was a bad pick, I was just stating my personal preference. The jury isn't out on it yet, though - not by a longshot.

So, in short, we don't. But I think he will. Just my opinion. There's just as much of a chance that I'm wrong as there is that I am right.

JeffMangum is offline  
Old
05-10-2011, 06:06 PM
  #300
GAGLine
Registered User
 
GAGLine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 9,313
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DatsyukSOGoal View Post
Why are people still blaming the Rangers for taking Sanguinetti. First of all, other GMs wanted him, so it's not like the Rangers were the only one. Second of all, nobody knew Giroux would turn out the way he did. The pick was fine, the result was not... so what? Hindsight is 20/20 you can't judge on hindsight... and it's not like you know-it-alls knew Grioux would be a good player either...
If you don't judge on hindsight, how would you judge? If the team drafts players that seem like homeruns at the time and they turn out to be busts, shouldn't they be accountable for that? They get paid to win. If the moves they make don't result in wins, they get replaced. It's really that simply. Well, that simple everywhere but in New York.

There are no excuses. I'm not going to feel bad for management because Cherry died, or Blackburn got hurt, or whatever. The only thing that matters is the results. We can sit here and argue all day about what they should have or shouldn't have done, but in the end, it's about wins. If management fails to build a winning team, replace them with people who can.

GAGLine 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 08:25 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.