HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Notices

Glen Sather

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-03-2011, 09:46 AM
  #101
Swept In Seven
Muh Offensive Talent
 
Swept In Seven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country:
Posts: 9,198
vCash: 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sting36e View Post
Well, that's my point. They are two different types of players, and I'd much rather have the more versatile, more dangerous, and more difficult to stop of the two, and that is Kovalchuk.



But that doesn't change the fact that when they are surrounded by winners, they play. So, realistically, their lack of interest in playing when there is nothing on the line shouldn't be a problem, as long as the team paying them is serious about winning. Most players who don't give enough effort are not worth the trouble. Some mega talents, however, are. If I was a contending team looking for skill, I would sign Kovalev in a heart beat. Maybe not so much anymore because at this point he is quite old, but 2 or 3 years ago? No hesitation. Even today, at 38 years of age, he's a better passer than 95% of the league.



Yeah, the reason is they were all incredible players and they all won while playing with other, usually even more, incredible players.



I must have missed when Gaborik won anything. Neither have ever had much support, and not surprisingly, neither has ever won anything. That, however, doesn't change the fact that Kovalchuk is better than Gaborik.



It's hard not to be seen as a loser when you've only played on terrible teams. Also, Gaborik had the benefit of playing most of his career under Lemaire, a great coach who tailored a system that was perfect for Gaborik. Kovalchuk has spent the bulk of his career playing for some horrendously coached, not to mention managed, Atlanta teams.

We'll see how big of a loser Kovalchuk is in a few years. My guess is he'll shake that loser tag pretty quickly once the Devils finish restocking. I don't know that playing more defense means that Gaborik plays a more complete game, since offensively, Kovalchuk's arsenal > Gaborik's. I don't really care that Gaborik can play adequate defense. That's not really what I'm looking for from him. Great all-around teams can afford to have one or even two weak links defensively. Great goaltending and great team defense can make up for that, and sometimes the chance to gain phenomenal offense is worth that. Pavel Bure and Jaromir Jagr never played any defense, either.
Are you serious? That defensive system that Gaborik had to play in was really tailored towards him to maximize his offensive output.

Swept In Seven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2011, 10:31 AM
  #102
Riche16
Pessimistic-Realist
 
Riche16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: FL
Country: United States
Posts: 3,432
vCash: 500
The team that Sather has now assembled (& is assembling) will be how hes judged IMHO. If after a few years we have a cup, no one will ***** about Sather. If it's more of the same he'll be hated.

Like Tiger always says "winning solves everything"

Riche16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2011, 10:33 AM
  #103
Darrelle Lundqvist
Swagelin
 
Darrelle Lundqvist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 1,781
vCash: 500
I like what Sather has done the past year or so with this team. Hopefully all of the development and signings will pan out. However I just don't see the Rangers as a contender as long as he and Dolan are at the helm.

Darrelle Lundqvist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2011, 10:45 AM
  #104
Chief
Registered User
 
Chief's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: NY, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,807
vCash: 500
The most important thing Sather has going for him is his owner's support. He has had time to correct mistakes which other GM's wouldn't have had. Getting over the hump of being a PO team to a Cup winner is the hardest leap to make, with so many factors involved. That'll be the true test for Slats.

Chief is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2011, 11:11 AM
  #105
nyr7andcounting
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,919
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kel Varnsen View Post
Like that has really stopped us before... Remember Chris Drury? He was disposed of about a week ago, NMC and all.
You're overlooking the most important difference between the NMC for Drury and Richards which is the contract length. When Drury signed for 5 years at age 31 with a NMC it wasn't unreasonable to think he would be serviceable for most of the contract. When he became unserviceable we only had to buy out 1 year and the cap hit isn't a killer because he was still due to be paid $5 million this coming season anyway.

In Richards case, if he does have a NMC for the entire contact, it's much riskier because it's 9 years and he has the three years at the end where he's only being paid $1 million but his cap hit is still $6.6 million.

The buyout penalty is essentially what you save each season by buying him out versus paying him his scheduled salary, subtracted from his original cap hit for that year. Since his salary for those years is only $1 million there would be almost no savings and thus no cap relief. Basically, during the seasons when he'll be 37-39 his cap hit is between $6-$7 million regardless if he plays or we buy him out at some point. So giving Richards a NMC for the full contract is much, much different than it was when we gave it to Drury.

As for Sather I give him a D before the lockout, a C since. Signing a UFA doesn't improve my opinion of a GM until that UFA performs above expectations/salary. Most of his trades have been great and drafting has been okay considering where we've picked, but despite that we haven't finished above 5th in the east since the lockout and our 2 worst seasons by points since the lockout have been the last 2.


Last edited by nyr7andcounting: 07-03-2011 at 11:19 AM.
nyr7andcounting is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2011, 12:23 PM
  #106
NYR Sting
Heart and Soul
 
NYR Sting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJBergy86 View Post
Are you serious? That defensive system that Gaborik had to play in was really tailored towards him to maximize his offensive output.
Quote:
Originally Posted by asakuj View Post
Trap teams really do bring out the best in dynamic offense first guys.. wait, no they don't. Stop the trolling, you devils fans are intolerable..

Devils fan? Troll? LOL

You're out of your element. You know not of what you speak. Lemaire's version of the trap, especially in Minny, was aimed at stopping the other team in the center of the rink and then sending the Wild back into the offensive zone with numbers. It was perfect for Gaborik. It gave him time, space, and a scrambling defense that often wasn't able to get to him in time. A lot of his goals in Minnesota came off of plays like that.

NYR Sting is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2011, 12:30 PM
  #107
mrjimmyg89
'13-'14 East Champs
 
mrjimmyg89's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 2,823
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sting36e View Post
Devils fan? Troll? LOL

You're out of your element. You know not of what you speak. Lemaire's version of the trap, especially in Minny, was aimed at stopping the other team in the center of the rink and then sending the Wild back into the offensive zone with numbers. It was perfect for Gaborik. It gave him time, space, and a scrambling defense that often wasn't able to get to him in time. A lot of his goals in Minnesota came off of plays like that.
He did that cause of lack of a center to play with him. By the time Koivu came around, Gaborik was injured and then left the team. Now, he has a center to play with that have the vision to get him the puck when and where he needs it. He'll also put it right on his tape as well.

mrjimmyg89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2011, 12:36 PM
  #108
NYR Sting
Heart and Soul
 
NYR Sting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrjimmyg89 View Post
He did that cause of lack of a center to play with him. By the time Koivu came around, Gaborik was injured and then left the team. Now, he has a center to play with that have the vision to get him the puck when and where he needs it. He'll also put it right on his tape as well.
Absolutely. They were at a disadvantage in the zone because they didn't have any great playmakers, so they utilized a system that was all about creating opportunities in transition.

I can't wait to see how Richards improves Gaborik's game, but I'll still stick with my initial point: it was a shortsighted signing (Gaborik, that is).


Last edited by NYR Sting: 07-03-2011 at 12:46 PM.
NYR Sting is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2011, 12:40 PM
  #109
Fitzy
All Is Well
 
Fitzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 19,831
vCash: 50
Even if Gaborik turns out to be a guy who isn't improved by Richards, it is hard to doubt that Richards could then go to a line with any 2 of our remaining winger and likely improve them tremendously.

Also ignored often is that Richards gives us a proven powerplay quarterback.

__________________
"I have something better than proof: I have anecdotal evidence."
Fitzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2011, 12:56 PM
  #110
chosen
Registered User
 
chosen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,599
vCash: 500
Why is no one the least bit concerned about the lack of defensive responsibility that Richards brings?

I understand tht he will counter that with an improved power play, but in combo with his recent concussion and his 9 year contract, I am not sold on this deal. Our two top paid forwards are the most likely ones to go down.

Hopefully they both stay healthy, but if either goes down, big trouble is coming for years.

chosen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2011, 01:08 PM
  #111
t3hg00se
Registered User
 
t3hg00se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 3,392
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to t3hg00se
Gaborik going down would hurt less than BR going down.

Dubinsky-Richards-Callahan

would be a hell of a line.

t3hg00se is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2011, 02:51 PM
  #112
NHRangerfan
enfoonts
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: New Hampshire
Country: United States
Posts: 3,091
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthlandPro View Post
Look, despite what his expert critics on here say, the cupboard was bare of prospects and the organization lacked the professionals in the scouting and developmental departments. All of that has changed now. UFAs were necessary for several reasons the least of which was putting a product on the ice to put fannies in the seats. This is not Pittsburgh, NJ or LI where you can tank it and nobody cares. Sather is no different than any of his 29 peers. Sometimes you swing and hit a HR, sometimes you whiff.

Through it all he's still retained his trade capabilities. Seldom has he been on the wrong side. Now witht he right coach and quality personnel people decisions and direction are made easier. Sure he's made some really bad signings, but so have the guys across the rivers and no one says squat about them. One of them has had more coaches than carter has pills.

In the end you win some you lose some. Along the way you hope you've gotten smarter. The Cap has made a huge difference and I think he's learned. We've never been cap impaired but the one guy thought to be a genius finds himself once again in cap hell for the 3rd time! We've yet to lose a draft pick let alone a couple of 1st rounders for screwing up signings.
As a 30+ year Ranger fan the notion that this couldn't have been torn down is a huge myth...many long time Ranger fans thought that with Sather's meant the start of building the right way, the thought was he had the cache to tell ownership that there would be a few years of pain...unfortunately when he sat in the chair he the post cup Neil Smith.

All GM's make bad decisions but the "guy across the river" won 3 cups on a shoestring budget...remember what Sather said when he was in Edmonton about Neil Smith...well he got the money Smith did and has done squat.

NHRangerfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2011, 04:24 PM
  #113
Radek27
Registered User
 
Radek27's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 5,118
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Radek27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue Line Monster View Post
Sather hasn't done anything notable besides finding a bunch of different ways to barely squeak into the playoffs. And this with more resources than most GM's in the league.
Agreed. I still remember his quote when Smith was still GM here. Something along the lines if he had the resources of the New York Rangers he would build a cup team every year or something like that.

Well Slats what are we now? 0 for 10?

Smith>Slats in NY but Smith can't find a GM job.......

Radek27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2011, 04:28 PM
  #114
EventHorizon
Bring Back Ties!
 
EventHorizon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Budd Lake, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 3,897
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radek27 View Post
Agreed. I still remember his quote when Smith was still GM here. Something along the lines if he had the resources of the New York Rangers he would build a cup team every year or something like that.

Well Slats what are we now? 0 for 10?

Smith>Slats in NY but Smith can't find a GM job.......
A Cup team every year. That means all the Rangers have to do is win 3 Stanley Cups every year for 4 years to catch up.

EventHorizon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2011, 05:15 PM
  #115
chosen
Registered User
 
chosen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,599
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by t3hg00se View Post
Gaborik going down would hurt less than BR going down.

Dubinsky-Richards-Callahan

would be a hell of a line.
I would call it at best an average 1st line in the NHL, nothing to sneeze at, but nothing to send fear into the opponents.

That would also make our 2nd line suspect. To me, Dubinsky and Callahan are 2nd line caliber and that's where they belong, although I recognize Callahan might still be on the improve. I'm pretty certain that Dubinsky isn't.

To my other point, has anyone noticed the plus/minus stats that Richards has compiled? It makes me understand why some say he is a defensive liability.

chosen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2011, 06:50 PM
  #116
vipernsx
Flatus Expeller
 
vipernsx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 6,282
vCash: 566
Sather hasn't gotten any smarter. The people around him have changed. He just listens to the people around him and makes decisions based off of their input just like every other leader. He's just getting better input. Thank you Clark, Gorton, Tortorella, and Schoenfeld! Good riddance Maloney and Renney!

vipernsx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2011, 11:36 PM
  #117
Pizza
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 9,907
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chosen View Post
Why is no one the least bit concerned about the lack of defensive responsibility that Richards brings?

I understand tht he will counter that with an improved power play, but in combo with his recent concussion and his 9 year contract, I am not sold on this deal. Our two top paid forwards are the most likely ones to go down.

Hopefully they both stay healthy, but if either goes down, big trouble is coming for years.
I'd prefer to worry about what I can control. How's your summer goin

Pizza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2011, 11:37 PM
  #118
JeffMangum
A Love Supreme
 
JeffMangum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Listening to music
Country: United States
Posts: 54,491
vCash: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by chosen View Post
I would call it at best an average 1st line in the NHL, nothing to sneeze at, but nothing to send fear into the opponents.

That would also make our 2nd line suspect. To me, Dubinsky and Callahan are 2nd line caliber and that's where they belong, although I recognize Callahan might still be on the improve. I'm pretty certain that Dubinsky isn't.
Agree with this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chosen View Post
To my other point, has anyone noticed the plus/minus stats that Richards has compiled? It makes me understand why some say he is a defensive liability.
+/- is by far the worst stat in hockey(well, maybe after hits). The only time it's even relatively useful is when it completely stands out from one's teammates -- liek Jack Johnson's horrendous +/-'s.

__________________

#TannerGlass2014
SEEN YOUR VIDEO!
#SheWentToHarvard
JeffMangum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2011, 12:42 AM
  #119
chosen
Registered User
 
chosen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,599
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pizza View Post
I'd prefer to worry about what I can control. How's your summer goin
Summer is going great. Girlfriend moving in on Thursday.

chosen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2011, 01:22 AM
  #120
Radek27
Registered User
 
Radek27's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 5,118
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Radek27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Boyle View Post
+/- is by far the worst stat in hockey(well, maybe after hits). The only time it's even relatively useful is when it completely stands out from one's teammates -- liek Jack Johnson's horrendous +/-'s.
Not sure why it's the worst stat. How hard is it to get? Your on the ice for a goal you get a + for a goal against you get a -

It's not all that complicated so i'm not sure why it's such a bad stat.

Radek27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2011, 02:33 AM
  #121
Inferno
HFB Partner
 
Inferno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Country: United States
Posts: 19,780
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radek27 View Post
Not sure why it's the worst stat. How hard is it to get? Your on the ice for a goal you get a + for a goal against you get a -

It's not all that complicated so i'm not sure why it's such a bad stat.
it's a bad stat because it really doesnt have any story behind it. its arbitrary.

you can get a + for changing 5 seconds before a goal is scored.

you can get a minus because your goalie gives up a horrendous goal. you can get a minus because your d partner screws up. you can get a minus for many reasons that are beyond your abilities. unlike many other, more meaningful stats, like, goals, assists, shots on goal, etc.

as mentioned before it's only useful as an extreme negative outlier. it was a HUGE red flag for Enver Lisin before he came here. other than that, i pretty much ignore it.

Inferno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2011, 05:26 AM
  #122
chosen
Registered User
 
chosen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,599
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inferno272 View Post
it's a bad stat because it really doesnt have any context. its arbitrary.

you can get a + for changing 5 seconds before a goal is scored.

you can get a minus because your goalie gives up a horrendous goal. you can get a minus because your d partner screws up. you can get a minus for many reasons that are beyond your abilities. unlike many other, more meaningful stats, like, goals, assists, shots on goal, etc.

as mentioned before it's only useful as an extreme negative outlier. it was a HUGE red flag for Enver Lisin before he came here. other than that, i pretty much ignore it.
Started researching and 2 seasons ago, Richards was minus 12, the third worst on the team. To put it in perspective, another player on the team was plus 27.

In 07-08, Richards was second worst on TB.

In 06-07, Richards was second worst on TB.

In 01-02, Richards was second worst on TB.

In all his other seasons, he was never better than the median of the team. These stats point to his plus/minus being a real indicator of terrible defensive play and cannot be swept away as a statistical aberration.

chosen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2011, 08:03 AM
  #123
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,422
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chosen View Post
Why is no one the least bit concerned about the lack of defensive responsibility that Richards brings?

I understand tht he will counter that with an improved power play, but in combo with his recent concussion and his 9 year contract, I am not sold on this deal. Our two top paid forwards are the most likely ones to go down.

Hopefully they both stay healthy, but if either goes down, big trouble is coming for years.
You don't really get good offensive players who are also very good defensively. All the top teams in the league have players who are good offensively and usually only OK at best on defense.

Is it somewhat of a concern? Perhaps. But what exactly do you want his team to do instead of taking a shot at a guy like Richards? Say "oh this offensive player is not good on defense better not do it just gonna stay the course and play with only one legit 1st line player and magically hope the team gets better"?

This is the whole issue with getting Richards...without him, the Rangers just aren't gonna get a shot at being a cup contending team without tearing everything down again and restarting (trading players for a surefire centerman, or tearing down to rebuild with high draft picks). The odds of magically finding one in the later rounds of the draft aren't that great. So...you take a bit of a risk to get a decent shot at contending for the cup soon, or you sit there with your thumb up your ass and waste the best years of the guys you have developed at this point

As for his concussion, if he's healed up he should be just fine. The biggest problem is if he didn't give the concussion time to heal. He hasn't missed many games at all in his career so I'm hesitant to call him the most injury prone. Odds are good that Callahan is out for significantly longer than Richards in any given year

Levitate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2011, 08:06 AM
  #124
GAGLine
Registered User
 
GAGLine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 8,997
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chosen View Post
Started researching and 2 seasons ago, Richards was minus 12, the third worst on the team. To put it in perspective, another player on the team was plus 27.

In 07-08, Richards was second worst on TB.

In 06-07, Richards was second worst on TB.

In 01-02, Richards was second worst on TB.

In all his other seasons, he was never better than the median of the team. These stats point to his plus/minus being a real indicator of terrible defensive play and cannot be swept away as a statistical aberration.
Callahan was -7 last year, worst on the team. The year before he was -12, third worst on the team. The year before that he was +7, the best on the team. Did Cally suddenly become an awful defensive player in the last 2 years?

GAGLine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2011, 08:29 AM
  #125
chosen
Registered User
 
chosen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,599
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAGLine View Post
Callahan was -7 last year, worst on the team. The year before he was -12, third worst on the team. The year before that he was +7, the best on the team. Did Cally suddenly become an awful defensive player in the last 2 years?
First, that is a much smaller sample size.

Second, you are pointing to one season to try and refute a theory that another player's entire career has shown poor numbers.

chosen is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 03:45 AM.

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.