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

Comparing Messier/Richards Acquisitions (and state of franchises), 20 years later.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-02-2011, 08:40 PM
  #51
KreiMeARiver*
Have Confidence
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UES
Posts: 6,621
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Well, some people do. People who want a team that have proven themselves to be the best over a grueling 82 game schedule and a favorite heading into the playoffs.

But you're probably one of those "anything can happen" in the playoffs type of people - look no further than this silly thread you started with an incredibly loose interpretation of the 1991 Rangers vs. the 2011 Rangers.

I can admit that "anything can happen," but I've been around long enough to know that usually it doesnt.
First of all, don't put words in my mouth.

Sure, the President's trophy is nice, but it's not the Cup.

If you think the thread is silly, that's your opinion. For me, the acquisition of Richards gives me the feeling that we can contend.

Do I think we are ready for the Cup? No

Do I think Richards could be the key acquisition of a future Stanley Cup team? Yes

The maturation process for this team is still somewhat in its infancy, however I do believe there are major similarities between the 2 acquisitions.

Sue me if I don't start another BORING thread like most of the threads that go around here that, to me, are a total snore-fest.

I'd rather make people think and stir the pot a bit.

KreiMeARiver* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2011, 08:58 PM
  #52
gotmonte
Registered User
 
gotmonte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: New York
Country: Italy
Posts: 1,545
vCash: 500
I hear ya. Everytime I make a thread it gets deleted RIGHT AWAY yet they can have boring threads stay open. Like the PB and J thread.. Really?

lol

gotmonte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2011, 09:23 PM
  #53
Janerixon
Registered User
 
Janerixon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 3,730
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hightide85 View Post
Sure, the President's trophy is nice, but it's not the Cup.
I fully agree with this, winning the president's cup is like the first time you kiss a girl you really like in high school. You put in some work, it was really cool, you may even brag about it, but after a few days no one is talking about it, and you need to step your game up in order to get to the next level.

Does anyone think the Nucks are really that proud of winning the President's cup? Sure they will hang a banner, but that banner means you were great during the season, but lost when it counted most.

Janerixon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2011, 09:55 PM
  #54
Glen Teflon Sather
Like A Boss
 
Glen Teflon Sather's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Bloomfield, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 4,908
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Glen Teflon Sather
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hightide85 View Post
Well, we are approaching the 20th anniversary of our acquisition of "The Captain", and I believe their are some similarities of the aforementioned deal, and our signing of a one Mr. Brad Richards.

Richards, like Messier, brings a strong veteran presence to the locker room. Both are play-making centers, however Messier had a stronger nose for the net. Both are proven winners, having won Stanley Cups in the past.

Both were acquired as the team was on the way up, having strong core players already in place.

So, will the result be the same? Will Richards bring us a Stanley Cup?

Only time will tell, but I have to say, I like our chances!

**Also in this thread: Comparisons of the two franchises, both now, and in 1991. Any discussion of players would be based on 1991 opinions of that player, NOT 1994**
Are you really serious or are you living in fantasyland?
There is nothing even remotely similar between Mark Messier and Brad Richards as players, leaders, anything! The only similarity is that they're the same age when they came to the Rangers and that's it and that's all! Messier left the Oilers after winning four stanley cups(84,85,87,88) on perhaps the greatest team personnel wise in the history of the NHL.Then after Coffey and Gretzky were traded away, he singlehandedly destroyed the Bruins to carry an undermanned Oiler team to yet a fifth stanley cup. He is perhaps the greatest leader in the history of sports, a player capable of imposing his will on a game or series at any time for that matter. It wasn't an accident that his nickname was "Moose."

Brad Richards on the other hand is a nice player with above average passing skills. True, he won a stanley cup with the Bolts in 2004 and was the Conn Smythe winner in that playoff series but he was no better than the 3rd best player on that team behind Lecavalier and St LouIs.
He'll undoubtedly make the Rangers a better team but they still aren't even remotely close to the upper echelon teams in the league.

Opening up this thread is nonsensical, ridiculous and a complete waste of time. Some of you Ranger fans need to come to grips with reality and stop being blinded by your undying loyality to the team and organization which now that I think of it has been one of the most poorly run franchises in the NHL.
I wouldn't get my hopes up for a stanley cup anytime soon.

Glen Teflon Sather is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2011, 09:59 PM
  #55
KreiMeARiver*
Have Confidence
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UES
Posts: 6,621
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4th Line Grinder View Post
Are you really serious or are you living in fantasyland?
There is nothing even remotely similar between Mark Messier and Brad Richards as players, leaders, anything! The only similarity is that they're the same age when they came to the Rangers and that's it and that's all! Messier left the Oilers after winning four stanley cups(84,85,87,88) on perhaps the greatest team personnel wise in the history of the NHL.Then after Coffey and Gretzky were traded away, he singlehandedly destroyed the Bruins to carry an undermanned Oiler team to yet a fifth stanley cup. He is perhaps the greatest leader in the history of sports, a player capable of imposing his will on a game or series at any time for that matter. It wasn't an accident that his nickname was "Moose."

Brad Richards on the other hand is a nice player with above average passing skills. True, he won a stanley cup with the Bolts in 2004 and was the Conn Smythe winner in that playoff series but he was no better than the 3rd best player on that team behind Lecavalier and St LouIs.
He'll undoubtedly make the Rangers a better team but they still aren't even remotely close to the upper echelon teams in the league.

Opening up this thread is nonsensical, ridiculous and a complete waste of time. Some of you Ranger fans need to come to grips with reality and stop being blinded by your undying loyality to the team and organization which now that I think of it has been one of the most poorly run franchises in the NHL.
I wouldn't get my hopes up for a stanley cup anytime soon.
sorry about the breakup, bro. There's plenty of fish in the sea

KreiMeARiver* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2011, 10:10 PM
  #56
Richter35
Registered User
 
Richter35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,360
vCash: 500
really tough crowd here. I didn't watch the rangers then but i certainly remember the team a few years later. I think the team had a better set up then than now to be honest. leetch/zubov/kovalev (even as young players/prospects) were better than anything we have now. i see the gartner comparison to gabby, but maybe its just that we don't know where these current prospects will land that makes it hard to say how close the team is to contending with the addition of that one special player. I think someone said it earlier, nobody expects this team to win the presidents trophy this year, that should say a lot about where the teams were, relative to the rest of the league

Richter35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2011, 10:11 PM
  #57
Brooklyn Ranger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn, of course
Posts: 7,807
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hightide85 View Post
First of all, don't put words in my mouth.

Sure, the President's trophy is nice, but it's not the Cup.

If you think the thread is silly, that's your opinion. For me, the acquisition of Richards gives me the feeling that we can contend.

Do I think we are ready for the Cup? No

Do I think Richards could be the key acquisition of a future Stanley Cup team? Yes

The maturation process for this team is still somewhat in its infancy, however I do believe there are major similarities between the 2 acquisitions.

Sue me if I don't start another BORING thread like most of the threads that go around here that, to me, are a total snore-fest.

I'd rather make people think and stir the pot a bit.
I've been through this whole thread and still don't see a post from you explaining why you see the similarities beyond signing/trading for a first line center.

Brooklyn Ranger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2011, 10:13 PM
  #58
Glen Teflon Sather
Like A Boss
 
Glen Teflon Sather's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Bloomfield, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 4,908
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Glen Teflon Sather
Quote:
Originally Posted by I Eat Crow View Post
This team's depth is going to be ridiculous once Kreider and Thomas get to town. Our defense is already deep, although young. Henrik is Henrik. Our window to contend opened the day we signed Brad Richards. Only time will tell how long it stays open.
What in the hell are you talking about? How do you know that Kreider and Thomas will even make it as NHL players?
Seriously, I would temper my enthusiasm until these players that have been drafted during the Gordie Clark regime have had a chance to come to pre season camp and show us what they have.
The drafting has been a lot better the past 3-4 years granted but we all need to slow down and give these young players a chance.

Glen Teflon Sather is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2011, 10:42 PM
  #59
Glen Teflon Sather
Like A Boss
 
Glen Teflon Sather's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Bloomfield, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 4,908
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Glen Teflon Sather
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richter35 View Post
really tough crowd here. I didn't watch the rangers then but i certainly remember the team a few years later. I think the team had a better set up then than now to be honest. leetch/zubov/kovalev (even as young players/prospects) were better than anything we have now. i see the gartner comparison to gabby, but maybe its just that we don't know where these current prospects will land that makes it hard to say how close the team is to contending with the addition of that one special player. I think someone said it earlier, nobody expects this team to win the presidents trophy this year, that should say a lot about where the teams were, relative to the rest of the league
You think the Rangers had a better set up with their young players talentwise than we have now? Congratulations! A fan with a modicum of common sense around here and as we all know, "Common Sense Ain't Always So Common."
We have nothing on this team even remotely close in talent to Leetch, Zubov and Kovalev, not even to Amonte who was traded and became a 350+ goal scorer with the Black Hawks.
Some of these Ranger fans really need to chill out or at least temper their enthusiasm when it comes to the talent level on our team and in our organization. Now hear this, there is no elite level talent to be found anywhere is our organization to date and that includes Mr.Staal and " Queen Henrik." Have we been doing a better job in identifying young talent and drafting better? Yes. Has our fearless GM(who should have been gone 6 years ago) done a better job at not spending money frivously on lousy ufa's? Yes.
There is still a long way to go for this organization before it can compete with the upper echelon teams in the league most of whom have an elite level player or two on their rosters.

Glen Teflon Sather is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2011, 11:57 PM
  #60
Troy Mallette
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 29
vCash: 500
Long time Ranger fan here, but new poster.

I understand the OP's point. It is an interesting question that deserves a serious answer.

There are some parallels between then and now. We did have a young team who many felt were ready to take the next step.

But the comparisons fall a little short. We already had a first line center on that team and that team had also already tasted some reg season success. The team in the very early 90s was trying to go from very good to great.

The better parallel would be to our acquisition of Bernie Nicholls in '89(?). THAT was a young team going from mediocre to good, which is where we are now IMO.

Troy Mallette is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 12:22 AM
  #61
NYR Sting
Heart and Soul
 
NYR Sting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,506
vCash: 500
This team is not as good as that team was. The major, major difference is there is no one even close to as good as Zubov in terms of offensive skill from the blueline, much less Leetch. No real counter for Amonte or Kovalev. Dubinsky is the closest thing, I guess. The rest of the squad can kind of match, I suppose. Nemchinov/Anisimov, Weight/Stepan, Graves/Callahan, Gartner/Gaborik.

It's tough to compare because the game has changed so much in terms of the rules, style of play, conditioning, equipment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 4th Line Grinder View Post
Brad Richards on the other hand is a nice player with above average passing skills. True, he won a stanley cup with the Bolts in 2004 and was the Conn Smythe winner in that playoff series but he was no better than the 3rd best player on that team behind Lecavalier and St LouIs.
He'll undoubtedly make the Rangers a better team but they still aren't even remotely close to the upper echelon teams in the league.
Brad Richards is easily one of the top ten playmaking forwards in the league, and his passing skills are nothing but elite. Also, the Conn Smythe Trophy is awarded to the most valuable player of the entire playoffs. This is not the NBA. Brad Richards was, is, and always will be a better player than Vincent Lecavalier, particularly when it comes to playmaking, which is generally the most important quality needed from a top line center.

NYR Sting is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 12:33 AM
  #62
Bob Richards
Mr. Mojo Risin'
 
Bob Richards's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 46,046
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
No offense but were you around in 1991?
I have watched the '94 playoff games. That team was far superior to this one.

Bob Richards is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 12:36 AM
  #63
Jxmarts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 342
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupersonicMonkey View Post
Trading the core of the team would be infinitely stupid. First because there's a salary cap that makes young cheap talent necessary, and second because it helps the team compete for a longer period of time.

Im not convinced the team wouldn't have won the Cup, possibly more then once, if they kept Amonte and Weight. They probably would have had more prolonged success. Especially if they didn't run Zubov out of town.

Can't really compare the players from the two rosters, but the situation is similar.

Richards could put us over that hurdle we couldn't get over, and this team could realistically contend for the foreseeable future. Which was the reason for brining Mess in.

And Lundqvist is arguably already the best goaltender in Rangers history. With him in net and a very good team in front of him, anything is possible.

Its impossible to find a Leetch, arguably the best American born defenseman in NHL history, he's 67th? all time overall in NHL scoring.

And nearly impossible to find a Zubov, although we hope Del Zotto can be similar.

But again, looking at the situation, young team on the rise, needing that guy to push them over the hurdle into the top of the league, and Richards theoretically does that, like Messier did.

Dubinsky could boom into an elite level player like Graves did.

Again, nothing is exact, and we can't really compare most of the players, but its a similar situation. And similar reasoning for brining in Richards. They didn't only bring him in to wake Gaborik up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gotmonte View Post
Oh man.. thats a NO-NO. Saying MDZ could be the next ZUBOV or close to?!

Not in a million years.

Either you didnt watch Zubov in his prime or you are SERIOUSLY over reacting to MDZ's talents inwhich he was sent down his second year to learn some more and we dont even know what he will bring in the future.

Just because he is supposed to be a good offensive defenseman does NOT make him similiar to ZUBOV.

SupersonicMonkey did say that it's "nearly impossible to find a Zubov," so he clearly appreciates Zubov's talent. But unless your proposition is that you know for sure that MDZ at 21 will never reach his potential, then his upside remains. At 21, Zubov himself was still a year and a half from playing in the NHL, but he did go on to average just under 12 goals and 48 assists per 82 games in his NHL career. Despite his struggles last season, MDZ's upside as an offensive defenseman is still there, and there's no reason think he's not capable of approaching Zubov's numbers. Whether he does it, and does it for as long as Zubov did, may be debatable. But it's not unreasonable to hold out hope that he might.

Jxmarts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 01:19 AM
  #64
Brooklyn Ranger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn, of course
Posts: 7,807
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Troy Mallette View Post
Long time Ranger fan here, but new poster.

I understand the OP's point. It is an interesting question that deserves a serious answer.

There are some parallels between then and now. We did have a young team who many felt were ready to take the next step.

But the comparisons fall a little short. We already had a first line center on that team and that team had also already tasted some reg season success. The team in the very early 90s was trying to go from very good to great.

The better parallel would be to our acquisition of Bernie Nicholls in '89(?). THAT was a young team going from mediocre to good, which is where we are now IMO.
Good points--I think the comparision to where the team was in 1989 when Bernie Nicholls came is a good one. Of course, he averaged more than a ppg (as he did throughout his whole career--wow, just looked at his numbers! I had forgotten what an offensive power he was)) when he was here; I don't expect Richards to do that any more than I expect the Rangers to score close to 300 goals (297 the year before Messier came, 321 in 1991-2).

The biggest advantage for the Rangers is that Richards signed as a free agent--Nicholls cost the Rangers Tony Granato and Tomas Sandstrom (one of my favorites).

Welcome to the board.

Brooklyn Ranger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 02:22 AM
  #65
Jxmarts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 342
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Troy Mallette View Post
Long time Ranger fan here, but new poster.

I understand the OP's point. It is an interesting question that deserves a serious answer.

There are some parallels between then and now. We did have a young team who many felt were ready to take the next step.

But the comparisons fall a little short. We already had a first line center on that team and that team had also already tasted some reg season success. The team in the very early 90s was trying to go from very good to great.

The better parallel would be to our acquisition of Bernie Nicholls in '89(?). THAT was a young team going from mediocre to good, which is where we are now IMO.

Brad Richards is a skilled playmaker who appears to be a nice fit on the current Ranger team. But he is not nearly the imposing, all around player Messier was. I'm afraid we might be setting ourselves up for disappointment if we expect him to make the difference Messier did.

The parallel to Bernie Nicholls is much more appropriate, in terms of the impact that Richards will have as a player. If he and his linemates are healthy, Richards will definitely help this team. But if the Rangers win, it won't be because Brad Richards dominated both ends of the ice.

Jxmarts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 04:57 AM
  #66
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,856
vCash: 500
Why do people bring up Doug Weight? Can the mods just close this thread because a significant portion of this board doesn't remember the Theo Fleury days so there's zero chance they will remember how the 1990-91 Rangers were embarrassed in the playoffs by the Caps?

Weight was a 4th line center on the Rangers. Mark Messier. Darren Turcotte. Sergei Nemchinov. Randy Gilhen had a more significant role on the Rangers 91-92 than Weight did. Weight was traded the following season to Edmonton.

People treat Kovalev like a deity. The Rangers tried to trade him to Vancouver during the Cup season for Petr Nedved. The Rangers won in 1994 without a 2nd line center. So if HFBOARDS.com was around in 1994,the experts would rule out out the Rangers because they didn't have a 2nd line center.

RangerBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 05:25 AM
  #67
Black Tank
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: a NYer in England
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,170
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
Why do people bring up Doug Weight? Can the mods just close this thread because a significant portion of this board doesn't remember the Theo Fleury days so there's zero chance they will remember how the 1990-91 Rangers were embarrassed in the playoffs by the Caps?

Weight was a 4th line center on the Rangers. Mark Messier. Darren Turcotte. Sergei Nemchinov. Randy Gilhen had a more significant role on the Rangers 91-92 than Weight did. Weight was traded the following season to Edmonton.

People treat Kovalev like a deity. The Rangers tried to trade him to Vancouver during the Cup season for Petr Nedved. The Rangers won in 1994 without a 2nd line center. So if HFBOARDS.com was around in 1994,the experts would rule out out the Rangers because they didn't have a 2nd line center.
I remember those days clearly and I was very vocally against the Messier acquisition, throwing a fit despite my friends saying he was the real deal. I remember being slightly excited about the young core but didn't think they would become the stars they did, unfortunately mostly for other teams.

Anyway, your point is very valid. It's hard to remember accurately without shading those impressions with the results of hindsight.

I was mildly excited in 1991 because the mountain truly seemed unclimbable, I'm actually more excited now.

Black Tank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 08:55 AM
  #68
TheRedressor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Country: United Nations
Posts: 3,705
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4th Line Grinder View Post
You think the Rangers had a better set up with their young players talentwise than we have now? Congratulations! A fan with a modicum of common sense around here and as we all know, "Common Sense Ain't Always So Common."
We have nothing on this team even remotely close in talent to Leetch, Zubov and Kovalev, not even to Amonte who was traded and became a 350+ goal scorer with the Black Hawks.
Some of these Ranger fans really need to chill out or at least temper their enthusiasm when it comes to the talent level on our team and in our organization. Now hear this, there is no elite level talent to be found anywhere is our organization to date and that includes Mr.Staal and " Queen Henrik." Have we been doing a better job in identifying young talent and drafting better? Yes. Has our fearless GM(who should have been gone 6 years ago) done a better job at not spending money frivously on lousy ufa's? Yes.
There is still a long way to go for this organization before it can compete with the upper echelon teams in the league most of whom have an elite level player or two on their rosters.

All credibility in the discussion lost right there. Go learn how to determine what elite talent is and then maybe people will take your comments seriously in this thread.

TheRedressor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 09:30 AM
  #69
TonyTheGr8
Window shut..for now
 
TonyTheGr8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Morris County, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 4,073
vCash: 500
Hahaha..wow, this IS a tough crowd!! Sorry Hightide..you made the mistake of challenging the fans imagination..oh nos!!

I, on the other hand, completely see the comparison you were trying to make..it wasn't about the players, it was about the situation..maybe oughta put down the crack pipe and see that before jumping down your throat, eh?

Anyway..without getting to crazy, this team that Richards is coming to isn't anywhere CLOSE to the team Messier came to in 1991. And Richards isn't anywhere CLOSE to the player Messier was. And we don't have a Leech, or a Zubov or anything like that. We get it people. Does that mean that Richards isn't the start of the opening of the "window" to serious Stanley Cup contention? If anyone says it's not, they haven't watched the way this team has developed the last few years.

I've said it before, I'll say it again. We have a nice young core, a top 5 goalie and a very good defense all in place. Richards was needed for this team to take the "next step". We have him. More is needed. We are not legit contenders yet, but we are very close. We do the right things, and don't have any set backs in development, we will be SERIOUS threats come next year and the year after. Our "window" in my opinion is now OPEN.

TonyTheGr8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 09:58 AM
  #70
gotmonte
Registered User
 
gotmonte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: New York
Country: Italy
Posts: 1,545
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jxmarts View Post
SupersonicMonkey did say that it's "nearly impossible to find a Zubov," so he clearly appreciates Zubov's talent. But unless your proposition is that you know for sure that MDZ at 21 will never reach his potential, then his upside remains. At 21, Zubov himself was still a year and a half from playing in the NHL, but he did go on to average just under 12 goals and 48 assists per 82 games in his NHL career. Despite his struggles last season, MDZ's upside as an offensive defenseman is still there, and there's no reason think he's not capable of approaching Zubov's numbers. Whether he does it, and does it for as long as Zubov did, may be debatable. But it's not unreasonable to hold out hope that he might.
Zubov played in Russia and it was not known if he would come to America.

MDZ played an NHL SEASON, A COMPLETE ONE and couldnt make the team the following year on a rookie defense team.

MDZ might turn into a nice player, but you are hoping he turns into Zubov is like hoping callahan turns into Messier. Just because they are both good leaders and a forward and Callahan is a future captain and can pot the goals, does NOT mean he will be a Messier.

Same argument. Stop over glamoring our prospects. It does NO GOOD FOR THEM and. If and when he falls from the argument that he will not be a Zubov, you are gonna be all upset and throw him into every trade proposal on this board.

So lets just leave it as MDZ needs to prove himself as an NHL PLAYER before we can mock him up to one of the greats..

You are a VERY biased fan. You should take off your homer glasses and realize he is a PROSPECT.

I guess Kreider will be better than Adam Graves, no? I mean, he is touted as a big kid who can score.

gotmonte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 10:18 AM
  #71
NHRangerfan
enfoonts
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: New Hampshire
Country: United States
Posts: 3,091
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hightide85 View Post
Well, we are approaching the 20th anniversary of our acquisition of "The Captain", and I believe their are some similarities of the aforementioned deal, and our signing of a one Mr. Brad Richards.

Richards, like Messier, brings a strong veteran presence to the locker room. Both are play-making centers, however Messier had a stronger nose for the net. Both are proven winners, having won Stanley Cups in the past.

Both were acquired as the team was on the way up, having strong core players already in place.

So, will the result be the same? Will Richards bring us a Stanley Cup?

Only time will tell, but I have to say, I like our chances!

**Also in this thread: Comparisons of the two franchises, both now, and in 1991. Any discussion of players would be based on 1991 opinions of that player, NOT 1994**
Really good question but I think some people will misconstrue your question as a Messier vs Richards debate...both teams were coming off pretty similar records the prior 2 seasons just over .500, both acquired what was considered the Best Available #1 C.

I think the similarities end there though, because of Pocklingtons greed/financial situation, the Rangers also acquired Graves and Buek the same season. Amonte had a great rookie season, you had arguably one of the best goal scorers in Gartner.

NHRangerfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 10:24 AM
  #72
Troy Mallette
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 29
vCash: 500
Thanks for the welcome Brooklyn and Jx.

Troy Mallette is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 10:36 AM
  #73
KreiMeARiver*
Have Confidence
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UES
Posts: 6,621
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyTheGr8 View Post
Hahaha..wow, this IS a tough crowd!! Sorry Hightide..you made the mistake of challenging the fans imagination..oh nos!!

I, on the other hand, completely see the comparison you were trying to make..it wasn't about the players, it was about the situation..maybe oughta put down the crack pipe and see that before jumping down your throat, eh?

Anyway..without getting to crazy, this team that Richards is coming to isn't anywhere CLOSE to the team Messier came to in 1991. And Richards isn't anywhere CLOSE to the player Messier was. And we don't have a Leech, or a Zubov or anything like that. We get it people. Does that mean that Richards isn't the start of the opening of the "window" to serious Stanley Cup contention? If anyone says it's not, they haven't watched the way this team has developed the last few years.

I've said it before, I'll say it again. We have a nice young core, a top 5 goalie and a very good defense all in place. Richards was needed for this team to take the "next step". We have him. More is needed. We are not legit contenders yet, but we are very close. We do the right things, and don't have any set backs in development, we will be SERIOUS threats come next year and the year after. Our "window" in my opinion is now OPEN.
Yeah, well, this site doesn't scare me. You should see my debates in the comments section of some political sites. Now that gets interesting! Hockey fans don't scare me.

I'm glad to see some of you get it, and have enjoyed your points!

KreiMeARiver* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 10:46 AM
  #74
Jersey Girl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,911
vCash: 500
This is such a bizarre thread. The OP wants to compare the situations, but does not want you to compare Richards to Messier...well they are/were both part of their respective situations.

So if you don't want to see them compared, stop reading this post. If you do...

Anyone who thinks Brad Richards is comparable to Mark Messier at the same age obviously did not see Messier play in his prime. There is no comparison. I don't mean you watched the 1994 Stanley Cup video, I mean watching Messier play game in and game out, and how he changed the culture of a formerly losing organization.

As far as the rest of the situation...

1. There is nobody comparable to Zubov. Period. We can all hope all we like that MDZ turns into a Zubov, but there is probably a better chance MDZ turns into a Tom Poti. And even that is not guaranteed.

2. Then there is a guy like Leetch, who very few in the entire league can compare to, let alone someone in the current Rangers' organization. That's a monstrous difference between the two situations...one that in and of itself makes comparisons meaningless.

3. I agree with whoever said adding Richards is more like adding Bernie Nicholls. That's a better comparison. For those who don't remember, Bernie was a heck of a scorer.

Jersey Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2011, 10:50 AM
  #75
n8
WAAAAAAA!!!
 
n8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: san francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 7,404
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hightide85 View Post
Well, we are approaching the 20th anniversary of our acquisition of "The Captain", and I believe their are some similarities of the aforementioned deal, and our signing of a one Mr. Brad Richards.

Richards, like Messier, brings a strong veteran presence to the locker room. Both are play-making centers, however Messier had a stronger nose for the net. Both are proven winners, having won Stanley Cups in the past.

Both were acquired as the team was on the way up, having strong core players already in place.

So, will the result be the same? Will Richards bring us a Stanley Cup?

Only time will tell, but I have to say, I like our chances!

**Also in this thread: Comparisons of the two franchises, both now, and in 1991. Any discussion of players would be based on 1991 opinions of that player, NOT 1994**
you really should have included the roster from 91. without it, you know this is just going to end up a Messier vs Richards thread because that's how you named the thread. Everyone will say "oh course Messier" I'd even go so far as to do your own comparison to get the ball rolling.

here, you can start here.
http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/l...000481992.html
I'll say we ain't gonna have no 100 pt. defenseman this season (Leetch) or even a 70 pt one at that (Patrick)

n8 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 01:17 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.