HFBoards

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

Falardeau to Charlotte

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-03-2006, 01:34 PM
  #51
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Steinbrenner View Post
what no mention of Jaret Stoll..The thread has only been up for a couple of days..

It's a mistake to send this kid to Charlotte and i still say he is going to make in in the NHL one day..

I know we could've somebody else (just like with jessiman) but the draft is a crapshoot...
Gotta tell you SOS I really just don't see it.

Guys who score like Lee have to at least be fighters to make the NHL or bring something really dynamic to that next level.

Ortmeyer is one of the guys I can think of and even he put up points at the college level, some points at the AHL and provided an amazing amount of energy.

Lee really doesn't do any of that and usually guys produce at the AHL level to make the NHL.

The question also becomes, what exactly is making it?

Does play 80 games over a 2 or 3 year span count? Does playing 4 years before being phased out (which we see a lot in the NHL) count? I don't know personally.

I don't see Lee bringing enough of anything to be an everday NHL player.

Avoiding the whole debate on who else was out there and timing and focusing just on Lee himself, I still don't see a very good player. Never have.

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2006, 05:10 PM
  #52
McRanger
Registered User
 
McRanger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,701
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
I don't think you can say the picks had about 1/100 of the impact on this team as it seems to have on the posters on this board for the reason that BigE mentions. The 03 draft in particular was so deep. And the Rangers reached for a player who was a boom or bust guy when they really needed someone that they were sure would play at this level.

This team would be a lot further along if those picks were playing in the NHL.
Sorry but one draft does not make or break a team.

Further along? Of course this team would be further along if Getzlaf was on the team. This team would be A HELL OF ALOT further along with Smith and Sather had done their job from '95-'03

McRanger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2006, 05:40 PM
  #53
BigE
Registered User
 
BigE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: San Francisco, CA
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,476
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
What I find so interesting is the GM of a perenial playoff team and often mentioned Cup contender who managed to make the playoffs and still come away with Pitkanen, Carter, Richards and Gagne just got fired.
As much as I hate Bobby Clarke, I've always given him credit for his first round draft choices.

I must say, however, that for all the talk about how deep the '03 draft was we may still come out of it alright: Ivan Baranka, Nigel Dawes, Jan Marek, Kenny Roche.

BigE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2006, 05:45 PM
  #54
BDubinskyNYR17*
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: New York
Posts: 10,761
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to BDubinskyNYR17*
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE View Post
As much as I hate Bobby Clarke, I've always given him credit for his first round draft choices.

I must say, however, that for all the talk about how deep the '03 draft was we may still come out of it alright: Ivan Baranka, Nigel Dawes, Jan Marek, Kenny Roche.
jan marek has to prove he has the desire and heart to come to NA. Once he comes over, then maybe he will do alright, he is already 28

BDubinskyNYR17* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2006, 05:54 PM
  #55
BigE
Registered User
 
BigE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: San Francisco, CA
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,476
vCash: 500
Who says he even has to come to NA or play for this team?

A successful draft doesn't necessarily mean the players all have to wear Ranger uniforms. As long as they contribute to the success of the team in some manner, it should be considered a good draft.

If we can package Jessiman and Marek in a deal that brings us someone that actually suits up, that isn't bad either.

Personally, I don't think Marek plays for the Rangers. I'm not even sure he plays in the NHL. The fact that we got him in the last round of the draft made him worthy of mention.

BigE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2006, 06:45 PM
  #56
BDubinskyNYR17*
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: New York
Posts: 10,761
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to BDubinskyNYR17*
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE View Post
Who says he even has to come to NA or play for this team?

A successful draft doesn't necessarily mean the players all have to wear Ranger uniforms. As long as they contribute to the success of the team in some manner, it should be considered a good draft.

If we can package Jessiman and Marek in a deal that brings us someone that actually suits up, that isn't bad either.

Personally, I don't think Marek plays for the Rangers. I'm not even sure he plays in the NHL. The fact that we got him in the last round of the draft made him worthy of mention.
sather rather give millions to ozo and rachunek

BDubinskyNYR17* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2006, 07:48 PM
  #57
Kendo
Registered User
 
Kendo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: The Hamburger Train.
Posts: 234
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AHall18NYR View Post
sather rather give millions to ozo and rachunek
Sorry, but isn't the fact that Sather DID give millions to Rachunek support for the argument that he may in fact give 1.8 to Marek as well?

I know you were just being snarky, but it seems that you are just looking for an excuse to poop on Sather's face.

Kendo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2006, 08:16 PM
  #58
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 29,773
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by McRanger View Post
Sorry but one draft does not make or break a team.

Further along? Of course this team would be further along if Getzlaf was on the team. This team would be A HELL OF ALOT further along with Smith and Sather had done their job from '95-'03
It's not a question of one draft making or breaking a team. Both Jessiman and Falardeau were reaches. And when you're drafting in the situation the Rangers are/were, you have to get a guy who is going to play at this level (even if that means sacrificing potential upside). You don't have the luxury of the boom or bust draft pick.

This team would look a whole lot better with Parise or Richards or Bergeron or Getzlaf centering Prucha and Shanahan.

__________________
SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2006, 08:18 PM
  #59
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 29,773
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by AHall18NYR View Post
sather rather give millions to ozo and rachunek
1) Sather did not give Ozo his current contract.

2)1.8M is a pretty reasonable contract for Rachunek.

I hate Sather as much as the next guy but lets have a little perspective here.

SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2006, 08:21 PM
  #60
BDubinskyNYR17*
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: New York
Posts: 10,761
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to BDubinskyNYR17*
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
1) Sather did not give Ozo his current contract.

2)1.8M is a pretty reasonable contract for Rachunek.

I hate Sather as much as the next guy but lets have a little perspective here.
i know he did not give ozo his contract but him accepting it, is sad, which tells us he has no faith at all in pock and or any dman that is young

BDubinskyNYR17* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2006, 08:24 PM
  #61
John Flyers Fan
Registered User
 
John Flyers Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 22,345
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
What I find so interesting is the GM of a perenial playoff team and often mentioned Cup contender who managed to make the playoffs and still come away with Pitkanen, Carter, Richards and Gagne just got fired.
He wasn't fired .. and just rejoined the team in an advisory capacity.

John Flyers Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2006, 08:27 PM
  #62
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 29,773
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Flyers Fan View Post
He wasn't fired .. and just rejoined the team in an advisory capacity.
Whatever. Either way, he lost his job. You know what I'm saying.

SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2006, 10:45 PM
  #63
BigE
Registered User
 
BigE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: San Francisco, CA
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,476
vCash: 500
I swear JFF and GKJG are the same person.

BigE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2006, 10:54 PM
  #64
FmmF3*
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 197
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
1) Sather did not give Ozo his current contract.

2)1.8M is a pretty reasonable contract for Rachunek.

I hate Sather as much as the next guy but lets have a little perspective here.

1) Sather was dumb enough to trade for that contract

2) Did Rachunek even make $1.8m pre-lockout?

TERRIBLE management by Rangers, I think last offseason was just a fluke.

FmmF3* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-04-2006, 09:16 AM
  #65
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 29,773
vCash: 500
Awards:
1) Sather traded for a player, not a contract.

2) You can say what you want but Rachunek has a very reasonable contract.

SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-04-2006, 10:26 AM
  #66
BigE
Registered User
 
BigE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: San Francisco, CA
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,476
vCash: 500
I think the Rachunek experiment was worth it. Although I'll be upset if he's brought back.

A team in our position needs to take chances on players like Rachunek - potential, relatively young - $1.8 isn't THAT much, and it's only a one year.

BigE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-04-2006, 10:45 AM
  #67
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 29,773
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE View Post
I think the Rachunek experiment was worth it. Although I'll be upset if he's brought back.

A team in our position needs to take chances on players like Rachunek - potential, relatively young - $1.8 isn't THAT much, and it's only a one year.
That's exactly my point. He had very good seasons in Russia. Worth the risk.

SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-04-2006, 12:18 PM
  #68
BDubinskyNYR17*
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: New York
Posts: 10,761
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to BDubinskyNYR17*
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
That's exactly my point. He had very good seasons in Russia. Worth the risk.
so did jiri dopita and jan hlavac, had great season in europe as well. id rather give that money to jan marek, to bad sather dont want to give him a one way contract. i know u have to earn ur ice time, oh wait only rookies have to earn it, the vets get to play no matter what. Too bad we wont bring Jan Marek over anytime soon, he is already 28.

BDubinskyNYR17* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-04-2006, 12:23 PM
  #69
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 29,773
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by AHall18NYR View Post
so did jiri dopita and jan hlavac, had great season in europe as well. id rather give that money to jan marek, to bad sather dont want to give him a one way contract. i know u have to earn ur ice time, oh wait only rookies have to earn it, the vets get to play no matter what. Too bad we wont bring Jan Marek over anytime soon, he is already 28.
So you would have given money to Marek, someone who has never played in the NHL. Methinks if that had happen, Marek would be the odds-on favorite to be the principle piece in your trade proposals.

SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-04-2006, 12:50 PM
  #70
BDubinskyNYR17*
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: New York
Posts: 10,761
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to BDubinskyNYR17*
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
So you would have given money to Marek, someone who has never played in the NHL. Methinks if that had happen, Marek would be the odds-on favorite to be the principle piece in your trade proposals.
well maybe Marek would have helped the rangers offense. u never know till u try. At worst we could have sent him to AHL or have a clause to go to europe if he dont make the Rangers, some teams do that to their european prospects.

BDubinskyNYR17* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-04-2006, 12:56 PM
  #71
McRanger
Registered User
 
McRanger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,701
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
It's not a question of one draft making or breaking a team. Both Jessiman and Falardeau were reaches. And when you're drafting in the situation the Rangers are/were, you have to get a guy who is going to play at this level (even if that means sacrificing potential upside). You don't have the luxury of the boom or bust draft pick.
Thats my point. The 2003 draft would be infinitely less critical to the Rangers had they not spend the previous half dozen years before it screwing things up. Players that didnt pan out, top draft picks moved for aging vets, unfortunate injuries...

Smith failed to draft and/or develop the players that should make up the current core of this team, guys from the '96-'99 drafts that would be hitting their prime right now. Sather continued the trend, and maybe even made it worse, which is why our best draft picks are still very young, and the older ones that are NHL ready are late round "finds".

Every team, even the best ones, screws up draft picks. Plenty of them go off the board and make ridiculous selections. The good teams make it so one bad selection doesnt bury you. The Rangers are no different.

McRanger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-04-2006, 01:05 PM
  #72
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Thats my point. The 2003 draft would be infinitely less critical to the Rangers had they not spend the previous half dozen years before it screwing things up. Players that didnt pan out, top draft picks moved for aging vets, unfortunate injuries...
But the problem is you can't go with that approach. It's like saying "Well we wouldn't be as angry is we won the game".

Well yeah of course it wouldn't have been so bad if the Rangers hadn't done bad moves before hand, but the problem/the reality is that they did and bad moves often times change the way you approach certain situations.

Quote:
Smith failed to draft and/or develop the players that should make up the current core of this team, guys from the '96-'99 drafts that would be hitting their prime right now. Sather continued the trend, and maybe even made it worse, which is why our best draft picks are still very young, and the older ones that are NHL ready are late round "finds".

Every team, even the best ones, screws up draft picks. Plenty of them go off the board and make ridiculous selections. The good teams make it so one bad selection doesnt bury you. The Rangers are no different.
The problem is that it was two selection, further compounded by the fact that this team didn't have a first round pick in 2000 or 2002. Lee and Hugh were part of a problem that was really 4 or 5 bad first picks, they also served as the exclamation point.

When you really add it all up 96-2003 was about as piss poor as you can get.

But by 2002 or 2003 the team KNEW how badly they had already drafted and made risky picks anyway. That just compounds the stupidity.

It's one thing to make mistakes when your ignorant and you haven't seen results yet. It's another thing completely when you are aware of those results, then it becomes stupidity.

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-04-2006, 03:32 PM
  #73
BigE
Registered User
 
BigE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: San Francisco, CA
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,476
vCash: 500
I see this kind of mentality all the time with novice investors that get emotionally involved with their portfolio. They have this tendency to double up on a plummeting stock instead of cutting their losses and moving on.

The funny thing about the Falardeau selection was their feeling that he was safe, and wasn't a risk. They picked the hard working kid believing that he'd magically sprout into the next Joel Otto.

BigE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-04-2006, 05:48 PM
  #74
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,006
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
When you really add it all up 96-2003 was about as piss poor as you can get.

But by 2002 or 2003 the team KNEW how badly they had already drafted and made risky picks anyway. That just compounds the stupidity.

It's one thing to make mistakes when your ignorant and you haven't seen results yet. It's another thing completely when you are aware of those results, then it becomes stupidity.
No need to add on to this, other than to say that Edge paints the perfect picture here. Sather had no right to draft those two.

True Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-04-2006, 08:27 PM
  #75
ATLANTARANGER*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Atlanta, B&R in NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 3,649
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
But the problem is you can't go with that approach. It's like saying "Well we wouldn't be as angry is we won the game".

Well yeah of course it wouldn't have been so bad if the Rangers hadn't done bad moves before hand, but the problem/the reality is that they did and bad moves often times change the way you approach certain situations.



The problem is that it was two selection, further compounded by the fact that this team didn't have a first round pick in 2000 or 2002. Lee and Hugh were part of a problem that was really 4 or 5 bad first picks, they also served as the exclamation point.

When you really add it all up 96-2003 was about as piss poor as you can get.

But by 2002 or 2003 the team KNEW how badly they had already drafted and made risky picks anyway. That just compounds the stupidity.

It's one thing to make mistakes when your ignorant and you haven't seen results yet. It's another thing completely when you are aware of those results, then it becomes stupidity.
Add my 2 cents to your dead on comments, the other important fact that is over looked was not only the cupboard bare, our scouting department who drafted the non entities we chose also needed to be replaced. It was not until Sather started hiring the scouts like Gordie Clark, Tim Murray, Rich Brown, Ray Clearwater, Andre Beaulieu, Pierre Dorion, Jan Gajdosik, Ernie Gare, Vladimir Lutchenko, etc that our drafts started to change.

ATLANTARANGER* 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 10:32 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.