demanding a multiple year contract at nothing less than the highest salary on the team, at his age, after dogging it through a regular season is weak ****
but i always liked jagr as a player and wished we made better choices during the Drury, Gomez, Redden cluster**** so we could have really competed while he was here
Yet for some reason, many of you are putting your hate towards him, when really it should be towards Sather.
I hate all former New York Rangers.
I especially hate those that leave for more money.
Finally I detest those that are declining in production and cannot see that their value to the team, while still respected is diminishing to the point where they are no longer the focal point and they cry about it as Jagr did.
Jagr clearly stated that your salary detemines your role on the team and thought he should have been the highest paid Ranger on a multi year deal at 35 years old.
Not taking into consideration, or straight out not caring how that would have affected the team Cap and salary structure.
The fact that NO TEAM offered him a multi year deal at that age justified Sather's position.
I did not blame the front office when Messier tried to rob them back in 97 and I do not blame management this time for Jagr.
The comment about compounding mistakes by giving Jagr a multi year deal is a very one sided way of looking at things. From the Rangers POV, sure what you're saying makes plenty of sense. From Jagr's POV, things look different. He's the captain. He's the leading scorer. He's the skater that the team leans on. Why shouldn't his salary reflect this?
That team simply wasn't good enough to justify spending more money on the exact same roster.
It's always nice to discuss things with someone whose primary response to points that he doesn't agree with is to call them "dumb," especially when this is the same person that considered a team with a defense constituted of Rozsival, Malik, very young Tyutin, very young Girardi, Pock, Mara, and Karel Rachunek to be a Cup contender. Because that isn't "dumb."
As for how I felt during the playoffs in 2005-06? I was furious. Part of me was excited, sure, although mainly because I had been waiting for Lundqvist to show up for 3 years and he was even better than I had imagined. But, by and large I was furious. Finally, I thought the Rangers were going to do the right thing and rebuild. Then they get Jagr, and somehow my nightmares live on. The team was god awful. Zero talent in the prospect pool, no depth on the roster, and virtually no players who had an actual future with the team. The team sucked and was dragged into the playoffs by two players, clearly not having a chance to do anything once there.
I knew exactly what was going to happen. They'd go out and over pay a bunch of **** free agents just like they did before the lockout. Guess what? That's exactly what they did. I knew they weren't going to win anything because the team sucked overall. Guess what? They didn't win anything. I knew that thanks to that worthless ****ing 2005-06 season that got us nowhere, we'd have to wait another 5 years before we actually had a team with players who were going to be there for a while, a team worth giving a damn about. Lo and behold, here we are, 2011-12, and finally, we have an actual team.
16 out of 30 teams get into the playoffs. Making the playoffs doesn't mean anything, and it doesn't do you any good, unless you actually have what it takes to do something once you get there.
you dont want parise because hes not a new york ranger, i called a team a contender that was 7.7 seconds and one win away from the conference final. which one is dumber?
making the playoffs doesn't mean anything? tell that to the 09 flyers and canadiens.
to say jagr's presence was horrible for the franchise is just dumb. so your telling me when he led us to the playoffs you were upset and didn't want to be there?
Limited thinking from you, just like the Avery situation.
Some people just have the capacity to analyze the bigger picture.
Limited thinking from you, just like the Avery situation.
Some people just have the capacity to analyze the bigger picture.
dumb thinking from anyone that doesn't want their team in the playoffs, especialy when they were 7.7 seconds and one win away from a conference final. its dumb to say jagrs time here was horrible for the franchise. dumb. D U M B.
and bringing avery into this, i thought it was the avery supporters that only talked about him. you haters are obsessed or something.
dumb thinking from anyone that doesn't want their team in the playoffs, especialy when they were 7.7 seconds and one win away from a conference final. its dumb to say jagrs time here was horrible for the franchise. dumb. D U M B.
and bringing avery into this, i thought it was the avery supporters that only talked about him. you haters are obsessed or something.
Just using that as an example to suppliment this one - how you seem to do all of your thinking in a vacuum. Sting already mentioned that the 06-07 team was the only "above average" Jagr squad and I agree. That squad made a good showing, but your argument seems to make them out to be better than they actually were. And its that type of ******** that led to handing 90 million dollars to Gomez and Drury in an attempt to take that "next step" when it was actually several steps backwards. A declining Jagr didnt help matters, either.
What is this "declining Jagr" BS? The guy has 29 points in 29 games and was a horse for us in the playoffs. The only thing that should've been declined is Drury and Gomez soliciting their services to the NYR.
Jagr isn't an all-time great Ranger or anything, but the guy deserves respect enough from everyone to admit that he's top 10 that's ever played this game and STILL a force on the ice.
I especially hate those that leave for more money.
Finally I detest those that are declining in production and cannot see that their value to the team, while still respected is diminishing to the point where they are no longer the focal point and they cry about it as Jagr did.
Jagr clearly stated that your salary detemines your role on the team and thought he should have been the highest paid Ranger on a multi year deal at 35 years old.
Not taking into consideration, or straight out not caring how that would have affected the team Cap and salary structure.
The fact that NO TEAM offered him a multi year deal at that age justified Sather's position.
I did not blame the front office when Messier tried to rob them back in 97 and I do not blame management this time for Jagr.
I guarantee you multiple teams offered him multi year deals. He just had decided it was either the Rangers or the KHL at that point. I remember him even flat out saying that.
What is this "declining Jagr" BS? The guy has 29 points in 29 games and was a horse for us in the playoffs. The only thing that should've been declined is Drury and Gomez soliciting their services to the NYR.
Jagr isn't an all-time great Ranger or anything, but the guy deserves respect enough from everyone to admit that he's top 10 that's ever played this game and STILL a force on the ice.
And the 3 seasons he played for the Rangers? 123,96,71.
You want to use the small sample sizes of the 2008 playoffs and 29 games with the Flyers? Fine. All it does is reinforce the narrative that he turns it on only when he wants to.
We can argue about the benefits of Jagr to the organization from 2005-2008, but anyone advocating giving him a multi-year deal that made him the highest paid player on the team at the end of the 2008 season needs to have their head examined....especially considering where the team is today.
I really liked Jagr with the Rangers. He was a rare star-on-the-downside who actually came to ny and quietly just put his head down and got it back together. usually those players just keep sliding with the rangers. not that it's always the players fault. sometimes its just dumb management. but for whatever reason, jagr was the opposite. nothing life-changing or anything, but i really liked jagr as a ranger. i was hoping theyd bring him back this year. anyhow, i am happy to chime in for jagr...good thread
And the 3 seasons he played for the Rangers? 123,96,71.
You want to use the small sample sizes of the 2008 playoffs and 29 games with the Flyers? Fine. All it does is reinforce the narrative that he turns it on only when he wants to.
We can argue about the benefits of Jagr to the organization from 2005-2008, but anyone advocating giving him a multi-year deal that made him the highest paid player on the team at the end of the 2008 season needs to have their head examined....especially considering where the team is today.
And you're ignoring his playoff numbers - 1, 10, 15 in those 3 years and ignoring the fact scoring was down league-wide each year after his 123 points. In 2007-8, only two players had over 100 points.
Regardless, if you were Jagr and the Rangers were paying Blomez 7.375 million, Redden 6.5 million and Drury 7+ million - what would YOU have asked for? Between those three and Lundqvist, the team was already 32+ million in the hole against the cap. Once the team signed the dynamite duo, the chances of re-signing Jagr were about zero. Hard to blame HIM for this one.
-Making the playoffs and not having any reasonable chance to do anything there is not respectable. It's called mediocre, or barely above that, and it only delays the rebuilding process for bad teams like the Rangers were.
-The Rangers were never contenders when Jagr was here. They had one season as an above average club, 2006-07.
-The Rangers could have been where they are today several years ago if they had never acquired Jagr at all. You know, like a rebuilding team might have done. Jagr's presence here essentially delayed the inevitable and probably cost us several year's of Lundqvist's career. Jagr's presence cost us a chance to draft in the top 3-4 for a season or two.
-Jagr never played defense, routinely took his time skating leisurely back to the bench after shifts while opposing teams got odd man rushes against. This happened virtually every game and a bunch of goals against every year were a result of that.
-The fact that the Rangers single season goal record belongs to a guy who got it in a season where scoring was ridiculously inflated sucks. Yeah, Jagr scored 56 goals the way Gomez scored 33 and Gionta scored 48. Give me a ****ing break.
-The team's "success" because of Jagr, and the resulting delusions about the team's greatness, spurred them to sign Gomez and Drury.
-Jagr didn't look anywhere near as good in 2007-08 as he does this season, but he wanted a ******** of money to stay, anyway. Remember how he didn't feel he could properly assume his role as a leader of a team unless he was paid like one, or whatever ******** he said?
Jagr is a great player, arguably the greatest European player of all-time. Watching him play was enjoyable, but his presence here did more harm than good for this franchise. His presence here allowed Sather to continue destroying this team, and if it weren't for Bob Gainey agreeing to make one of the worst moves in the history of the league, the Rangers would still be in the nightmarish scenario that stemmed from Jagr and his time with the club.
And, once again, I can't stand when this team gets hated players from huge rivals. I don't want to see guys I have a deep-seeded hatred for skating in Ranger sweaters. I want to beat those players. I didn't want Lindros, I didn't want Holik, I didn't want Kasparaitis, I didn't want Jagr, I didn't want Gomez. Get your own damn players! I don't care how good they are. I don't want Parise, either. I want New York Rangers!
One of the worst, most misleading post I've read here this year.
It's ok not to like the guy(JJ), but to make up stuff like this?
And only losers wishes to finish at the bottom to have good position at the draft.
Good teams find the way to be contenders even with late round draft picks.
One of the worst, most misleading post I've read here this year.
It's ok not to like the guy(JJ), but to make up stuff like this?
And only losers wishes to finish at the bottom to have good position at the draft.
Good teams find the way to be contenders even with late round draft picks.
You don't have to agree with Sting (although I do in this case), but what did he post that was misleading or made up?
That team simply wasn't good enough to justify spending more money on the exact same roster.
So the result is that you get rid of your best skater and player that put up 15 points in 10 playoff games, so that you can go out and sign...Wade Redden? Yea, the roster wasn't the same. It got much worse.
Sather blew it. I've made my peace with it...I just can't believe how many people actually seem to be in-line with his thinking.
One of the worst, most misleading post I've read here this year.
It's ok not to like the guy(JJ), but to make up stuff like this?
And only losers wishes to finish at the bottom to have good position at the draft.
Good teams find the way to be contenders even with late round draft picks.
If you're going to accuse me of making stuff up, how about you tell me what it is? I didn't make anything up. And if you think good teams find ways to be contenders even with late round draft picks, then I guess you shouldn't look at the NHL standings, where virtually every team at the top has very high draft picks playing huge roles for their teams.
I never said you can't be a good team without high picks, I just said it'll take you much longer. I'd rather not see **** teams get bounced early in the playoffs and instead not have to wait 5 more years to see a good, young team that is going somewhere. There are a number of reasons that 2011-12 is the first time the Rangers have iced a good, young team that is heading to good things for years to come, and Jagr is one of the biggest reasons it took this long. We could have gotten to this point a lot faster if we had never acquired Jagr.
And I don't dislike Jagr, per se. He's an incredible player. One of the greatest players of all-time. I just don't really care for players that only play hard when they feel like it.
I'm sorry, but I can't stand this line of reasoning. This is professional sports, not charity. What Jagr did is no different than probably 95% of people...you can probably include your "heart & soul" Lundqvist in that statistic. Last I checked he's getting paid the most money of all goalies in this league.
Let's see Sather try to screwgie him come contract time and we'll see how heart & soul he really is.
I'm knocking him for it. He's a mercenary. Always has been. That's fine.
I'm knocking him for it. He's a mercenary. Always has been. That's fine.
Could say the same thing about Gaborik, I suppose.
I appreciate what he did for us here. Was a little dissapointed that he ditched on us early, but we completely ignored him this UFA cycle to our own detriment. Anyone who had seen him play in the world championships could see that with some PP time he could still be a productive NHL player.
dumb thinking from anyone that doesn't want their team in the playoffs, especialy when they were 7.7 seconds and one win away from a conference final. its dumb to say jagrs time here was horrible for the franchise. dumb. D U M B.
and bringing avery into this, i thought it was the avery supporters that only talked about him. you haters are obsessed or something.
I agree with you 100%. That Jagr team was the most competitive team we have had since the lockout. Literally, on the cusp of the Conference Finals with him. Just needed a PPQB and we could have been contending for the Cup. You'll have to agree to disagree with them though, it's clear their mind is set on the notion that Jagr was a detriment to the organization
I guarantee you multiple teams offered him multi year deals. He just had decided it was either the Rangers or the KHL at that point. I remember him even flat out saying that.
I'd like to see the link from the teams that offered him multi year deals.
The player saying it, meh.
The teams confirming your statement here would be more helpful.
Edmonton offered him a 1 year deal.
The Rangers offered him a one year deal
Don't recall any othe rteam stepping up with a multi year offer.
Seriously, get me a link from a team confirming a 2 year offer.
Looking back on Jagr's 3 seasons as a Ranger (not counting the trade year)
S1 - incredible regular season, woeful playoffs (not alone here), average team success.
S2 - very good season, good playoffs (overshadowed by Nylander and Rozi IMO), slightly above average team success (and even if we had of got by the Sabres, Ott would have rolled us)
S3 - lowest point total since 91-92 (not counting shortened season), excellent playoffs, average team success.
Overall he came in, played well (especially for 2 seasons) and helped the team achieve SFA. The 05-06 season was fun to watch, but it lead nowhere. IMO the only reason he is looked back on so fondly is because of how god-awful this team was for so long.
He was pretty much just another high-priced signing (although obtained thru trade) who couldn't help the TEAM achieve any real success.
Could say the same thing about Gaborik, I suppose.
I appreciate what he did for us here. Was a little dissapointed that he ditched on us early, but we completely ignored him this UFA cycle to our own detriment. Anyone who had seen him play in the world championships could see that with some PP time he could still be a productive NHL player.
Gaborik hasn't garnered the reputation for being a moody, malcontent.
Jagr wanted money and a multi-year 35+ contract after a shockingly bad season, then rejected the Rangers offer on a 1 year deal. He could have stuck around and finished what he started if he was so proud of his "accomplishments" here and thought it was a path to success. Instead.........
I like what I see on the ice today. It wouldn't look like this if the team committed to building around Jagr 4 years ago. I was "fine" with his choice to turn his back on the team then and I'm MORE than "fine" with it now.
If we would've re-signed Jagr, Gaborik would not be here right now. And over the long run, he will prove to be more productive for us then Jagr would have.
