HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

90s Rangers

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-10-2012, 11:49 PM
  #1
johnnybbadd
Registered User
 
johnnybbadd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 12
vCash: 500
90s Rangers

The Rangers made some trades in the early 90s that were designed to get role players for a cup run but sacrificed some high end talent (Amonte, Weight) along the way. It payed off in 94 as they won the cup and that is what made it a success for them. They were however a game 7 overtime goal from New Jersey and a fearless Vancouver team that refused to give up away from not winning that year. (Although i think they were better than both those teams that year.) They also traded Zubov and Kovalev away in a couple of questionable trades afterwards that gave them horrible returns based on what they did later on.

My question is do the Rangers get to the final in the 90s to early 2000s by keeping a core of Graves, Messier, Leetch, Richter and Beukeboom while keeping players like Weight, Amonte, Zubov, Kovalev who all became core players for their respective teams after their early departure from New York?

johnnybbadd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 01:39 AM
  #2
shadow1
Registered User
 
shadow1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 11,267
vCash: 1210
Basically, yes. The Rangers dealt away four future stars for players that only helped for short periods of time or didn't help at all.

Zubov: Ulf Samuelsson stuck around for a while, but Luc Robitaille only played two seasons for the Rangers and wasn't very effective. Also traded away Petr Nedved in the deal.

Kovalev: Chris Tamer (one season), Sean Pronger (14 games), and Petr Nedved, who they shouldn't have traded away to begin with. Not very good return for arguably one of the most talented players ever.

Weight: Esa Tikkanen was a decent player during the '94 Cup run, but didn't even return to the Rangers the following season.

Amonte: Stephane Matteau and Brain Noonan. Yes, Matteau scored the biggest goal of the Rangers cup run, but otherwise was nothing special. Like Noonan and Tikkanen, Matteau found himself in St. Louis by the time 95-96 rolled around.

shadow1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 02:51 AM
  #3
Zil
Registered User
 
Zil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 3,261
vCash: 500
They also gave away Mattias Norstrom to bring in a completely done Jarri Kurri and later gave away Marc Savard for the chance to draft Jamie Lundmark. Neil Smith was a catastrophically bad gm post 94 when he both failed to draft anyone and gave away what little young talent they had. He was desperate to win another cup to keep the buzz going and went about it in completely the wrong way.

Zil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 03:01 AM
  #4
JSmith81x
Your weapon is guilt
 
JSmith81x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: illinois
Posts: 2,716
vCash: 1000
March 14th 1996
- New York Rangers trade C Ray Ferraro, LD Mattias Norstrom, RW Ian Laperriere, C Nathan Lafayette, and NYR's 1997 4th rd pick (#99, LD Sean Blanchard), for RW Jari Kurri, RD Marty McSorley, and RW Shane Churla

A complete dud for NYR. Kurri left for ANA after the season, McSorley for SJ, and Churla played half a season before retiring. Ferraro played 7 more seasons, Norstrom 12, Laperriere 13, and Lafayette parts of 3.

Then, once Neil Smith realized he couldn't trade for any more old Oilers (since they were mostly retired), he made his big statement at the 1999 Draft, which was not the one to do it for. Fired a year later.

June 26th 1999
- New York Rangers traded G Dan Cloutier, RW Niklas Sundstrom, NYR's 2000 1st rd pick (#8, RW Nikita Alekseev), and DET's 2000 3rd rd pick (traded repeatedly, eventually to CHI; #74, RW Igor Radulov) to Tampa Bay Lightning for CHI's 1999 1st rd pick (#4, RW Pavel Brendl)
- New York Rangers traded C Marc Savard, NYR's 1999 1st rd pick (#11, LW Oleg Saprykin) to Calgary Flames for LW Jan Hlavac, CGY's 1999 1st rd pick (#9, C Jamie Lundmark), and 1999 3rd rd pick (traded back to CGY; #77, G Craig Anderson)

Marc Savard
Dan Cloutier
Niklas Sundstrom
1999 1st rd pick (Oleg Saprykin)
2000 1st rd pick (Nikita Alekseev)
2000 3rd rd pick (Igor Radulov)
- for -
Jan Hlavac
Pavel Brendl
Jamie Lundmark
whatever they got for Anderson pick

edit: took so long typing that out, I was beaten by ten minutes


Last edited by JSmith81x: 02-11-2012 at 01:40 PM. Reason: edit #2, typo
JSmith81x is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 04:17 AM
  #5
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,881
vCash: 500
Yes, they mortgaged their future to lift the Curse of the mortgage.
Did everyone suddenly forget about that or maybe some weren't around at the time to know about it?

When MSG's mortgage was paid off in 1940, they burnt it in the Stanley Cup, in effect desecrating the Cup, starting the curse.

Ask any Red Sox fan if it's worth it

Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 04:53 PM
  #6
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 13,861
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnybbadd View Post
The Rangers made some trades in the early 90s that were designed to get role players for a cup run but sacrificed some high end talent (Amonte, Weight) along the way. It payed off in 94 as they won the cup and that is what made it a success for them. They were however a game 7 overtime goal from New Jersey and a fearless Vancouver team that refused to give up away from not winning that year. (Although i think they were better than both those teams that year.) They also traded Zubov and Kovalev away in a couple of questionable trades afterwards that gave them horrible returns based on what they did later on.

My question is do the Rangers get to the final in the 90s to early 2000s by keeping a core of Graves, Messier, Leetch, Richter and Beukeboom while keeping players like Weight, Amonte, Zubov, Kovalev who all became core players for their respective teams after their early departure from New York?
Probably not.

They just didnt match up well with the Devils, Flyers and Hasek. It took Richter's miracle work to get them to the CF in 1997. No way he would have been able to pull that off again with a soft team full of skaters and scorers against Philly's size or NJ's trap.

The Rangers went 7 years without beating the Devils during the Dead Puck era. That says something. Smith had Cup lust and it created a messed up strategy.

GWOW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 06:06 PM
  #7
King Forsberg
21 68 88 16 44 28
 
King Forsberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 5,128
vCash: 300
Didn't they also trade away Gartner?

King Forsberg is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 06:41 PM
  #8
NYR94
Registered User
 
NYR94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 5,687
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to NYR94
They traded Gartner for Anderson.

The fact that the Rangers parted with so many young players who went on to have very successful NHL careers never bothered me because I believe that without those trades, they would have never won the Cup in 1994. There are arguments that can be made for keeping them with the idea that they would have been better for longer (meaning they could have won multiple Cups or at least made more deep playoff runs), but it's all in the past now.

Even if they had kept those young players, I agree with German Way ofWar that they would have had a hard time getting past Philadelphia or New Jersey. Same with Pittsburgh when Lemieux and Jagr were both playing. The 94 team just had the perfect mix of finesse and grit, veterans and youth.

And I feel the same way now. If the Rangers move some talented young prospects for older veterans who are gone next year, it won't hurt if they win the Cup this June.

Having said that, on an individual level, the loss of Zubov still hurts.

NYR94 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 06:45 PM
  #9
Trottier
Very Random
 
Trottier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 27,494
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Yes, they mortgaged their future to lift the Curse of the mortgage.
Did everyone suddenly forget about that or maybe some weren't around at the time to know about it?

When MSG's mortgage was paid off in 1940, they burnt it in the Stanley Cup, in effect desecrating the Cup, starting the curse.

Ask any Red Sox fan if it's worth it
Thank you. Among the many mind-boggling topics one reads around this board, the implications that NYR would have been better off to have held on to those players is near/at the top. It bleeds HF mentality, whereby "what might have been" and pretty futures trumps actual success.

Fortunately, NHL GMs don't think that way. Fortunately for NYR, Neil Smith didn't. Otherwise it would very likely be 71 years and counting.

To be fair, the thread opener asked if NYR would have gotten to the Finals had they not made those deals, he did not discredit the trades. But frankly, it's moot. They got to and won the Finals without them. The things that matter. One Cup is a lot better than "maybe" one or more.

As a season ticket holder (hockey fan; not NYR fan, living in the City at the time) I was in MSG, June '94 when the Cup was raised. Ask anyone there if they would have preferred keeping the kiddies. Yeah, sure.


Last edited by Trottier: 02-11-2012 at 07:30 PM.
Trottier is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 07:10 PM
  #10
Tawnos
Moderator
BoH Mod Only
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 11,162
vCash: 500
It's funny how this kind of thing is all about perception. The Weight and Amonte trades are seen as sacrifices of the future for the present, but nobody ever mentions the Turcotte deal earlier in the season.

They traded a 25 year-old center who scored 20+ goals in his first 4 seasons in the league, plus 30 in two of those seasons, for an obviously aging 32 year-old winger who was holding out and would retire after the end of the following year. Ignoring the 30 year-old D one season removed from 70 points also sent in the deal, could you imagine the reaction to such a on these boards today? And why does this trade never get mentioned? Because Turcotte turned out to only have two truly productive seasons left in him. For the reason of hindsight, he's not considered one of the promising young players the Rangers traded to win that Cup.

On the other hand, if you give a guy credit for success, you gotta criticize him for failure. Smith made one really good trade post-94 and that was the Verbeek deal and that trade really only turned out well because the Whalers essentially got nothing for it. The rest of his deals? Zubov/Kovalev? Norstrom? Sundstrom? All terrible trades that set us back even further.

Tawnos is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 07:21 PM
  #11
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
 
Nalyd Psycho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: No Bandwagon
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,717
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trottier View Post
Thank you. Among the many mind-boggling topics one reads around this board, the implications that NYR would have been better off to have held on to those players is near/at the top. It bleeds HF mentality, whereby "what might have been" and pretty futures trumps actual success.

Fortunately, NHL GMs don't think that way. Fortunately for NYR, Neil Smith didn't. Otherwise it would very likely be 71 years and counting.

To be fair, the thread opener asked if NYR would have gotten to the Finals had they not made those deals, he did not discredit the trades. But frankly, it's moot. They got to and won the Finals without them. The things that matter. One Cup is a lot better than "maybe" one or more.

As a season ticket holder at the time (hockey fan; not NYR fan living in the CIty at the time) I was in MSG, June '94 when the Cup was raised. Ask anyone there if they would have preferred keeping the kiddies. Yeah, sure.
Exactly. Where Smith failed was the deals he made post-94. Giving up on Zubov, Norstrom, Kovalev etc without getting a solid return.

__________________
Every post comes with the Nalyd Psycho Seal of Approval.
Nalyd Psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 07:32 PM
  #12
Tawnos
Moderator
BoH Mod Only
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 11,162
vCash: 500
So... here's an interesting question. Is this lineup a Stanley Cup contender into the mid-90s?

Amonte-Weight-Kovalev
Granato-Turcotte-Sandstrom
Kevin Miller-Nemchinov-Dahlen
Mallette-Marchant-Broten

Leetch-Norstrom
Zubov-Patrick
Karpovtsev-Shaw

It's a pretty good lineup. Cup caliber? Maybe? Probably not.

Edit: With the exception of Leetch who was kept, those are all homegrown players that Neil Smith dealt... mostly in the lead-up to winning the Cup in 94.


Last edited by Tawnos: 02-11-2012 at 07:55 PM.
Tawnos is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 07:37 PM
  #13
shadow1
Registered User
 
shadow1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 11,267
vCash: 1210
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trottier View Post
Thank you. Among the many mind-boggling topics one reads around this board, the implications that NYR would have been better off to have held on to those players is near/at the top. It bleeds HF mentality, whereby "what might have been" and pretty futures trumps actual success.

Fortunately, NHL GMs don't think that way. Fortunately for NYR, Neil Smith didn't. Otherwise it would very likely be 71 years and counting.

To be fair, the thread opener asked if NYR would have gotten to the Finals had they not made those deals, he did not discredit the trades. But frankly, it's moot. They got to and won the Finals without them. The things that matter. One Cup is a lot better than "maybe" one or more.

As a season ticket holder at the time (hockey fan; not NYR fan living in the CIty at the time) I was in MSG, June '94 when the Cup was raised. Ask anyone there if they would have preferred keeping the kiddies. Yeah, sure.
Perhaps things would be a little less mind-boggling had you taken five seconds to look up when the four players at hand were traded. If you did, you'd know that Sergei Zubov and Alexei Kovalev were traded long after the New York Rangers won their '94 Stanley Cup, and both were among the team's top point contributors that post-season.

Thus, chastising the supposed logic of others and justifying it with incoherent ramblings of how the Rangers won the cup without these players doesn't add much substance to this thread.

shadow1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 08:24 PM
  #14
vadim sharifijanov
Registered User
 
vadim sharifijanov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 8,710
vCash: 500
it was under different circumstances (they were going to lose him anyway in the expansion draft), but the rangers also gave away john vanbiesbrouck, who had a hart finalist season and a run to the finals still in him.

i'd have thought the rangers could have done better than trade him to a team that wanted to keep their backup goalie (vancouver-- who traded doug lidster for beezer because once beezer was picked, they couldn't lose another goalie and so they got to keep kay whitmore). seriously mike smith? nobody else wanted john vanbiesbrouck in '93? i get that you wouldn't trade him in-conference (though he certainly would have been in demand from quebec, philadelphia, and the islanders), but detroit or LA could have given up much more than vancouver did.

vadim sharifijanov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 09:27 PM
  #15
Trottier
Very Random
 
Trottier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 27,494
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadow1 View Post
Perhaps things would be a little less mind-boggling had you taken five seconds to look up when the four players at hand were traded. If you did, you'd know that Sergei Zubov and Alexei Kovalev were traded long after the New York Rangers won their '94 Stanley Cup, and both were among the team's top point contributors that post-season.

Thus, chastising the supposed logic of others and justifying it with incoherent ramblings of how the Rangers won the cup without these players doesn't add much substance to this thread.
The thread opener mentioned players traded both before and after '94. Perhaps if you had taken five seconds, you would have noticed that I referenced only the meme popular around here about NYR and the moves they made in order to win a Cup in '94. Learn to connect the dots.

The fact that you suggest that "Brain" Noonan was insignifcant in the Cup run verifies that you likely weren't even on the earth (or following the sport) at the time. Talk about lack of substance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
it was under different circumstances (they were going to lose him anyway in the expansion draft), but the rangers also gave away john vanbiesbrouck, who had a hart finalist season and a run to the finals still in him.
From strictly a transactional standpoint, you may have a point. But transactions are made for to improve a team. To win.

And ridding itself of JVB, solid as he was, was a superb roster move, as it also ridded any goaletending issue (as there was prior). There was now a clear #1. And that #1 helped lead them to a Cup the very next season. End justified the means.


Last edited by Trottier: 02-11-2012 at 09:56 PM.
Trottier is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 09:41 PM
  #16
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 20,345
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos View Post
So... here's an interesting question. Is this lineup a Stanley Cup contender into the mid-90s?

Amonte-Weight-Kovalev
Granato-Turcotte-Sandstrom
Kevin Miller-Nemchinov-Dahlen
Mallette-Marchant-Broten

Leetch-Norstrom
Zubov-Patrick
Karpovtsev-Shaw

It's a pretty good lineup. Cup caliber? Maybe? Probably not.

Edit: With the exception of Leetch who was kept, those are all homegrown players that Neil Smith dealt... mostly in the lead-up to winning the Cup in 94.
... Not quite. Turcotte doesn't really work, and one would like a bit more toughness overall on the bottom-6. That first line has the potential to be absolutely filthy, though. Very good defense as well, though I'm not 100% convinced that Patrick could be a second pairing guy on a top-club at that point.

MXD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 09:59 PM
  #17
vadim sharifijanov
Registered User
 
vadim sharifijanov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 8,710
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trottier View Post
From strictly a transactional standpoint, you may have a point. but transactions are made for to improve a team. To win.

And ridding itself of JVB, solid as he was, was a superb roster move, as it also ridded any goaletending issue (as there was prior). There was now a clear #1. And that #1 helped lead them to a Cup the very next season. Ends justified the means.
the point was not that they should have kept beezer, which would have been impossible because of the expansion draft, but that they should have gotten a lot more for him.

i was absolutely shocked at the time that we were able to pick him up as an expansion draft decoy for an end of the line lidster. some people in vancouver were saying quinn should keep beezer and expose mclean-- we were all just so shocked that beezer came our way. me, i thought for sure he was going to a good team with subpar goaltending, like LA, for a good young player (sydor for example was thought to be an expandable asset).

vadim sharifijanov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 10:43 PM
  #18
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 13,861
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos View Post
So... here's an interesting question. Is this lineup a Stanley Cup contender into the mid-90s?

Amonte-Weight-Kovalev
Granato-Turcotte-Sandstrom
Kevin Miller-Nemchinov-Dahlen
Mallette-Marchant-Broten

Leetch-Norstrom
Zubov-Patrick
Karpovtsev-Shaw

It's a pretty good lineup. Cup caliber? Maybe? Probably not.

Edit: With the exception of Leetch who was kept, those are all homegrown players that Neil Smith dealt... mostly in the lead-up to winning the Cup in 94.
Lots of 10-8 games with that lineup.

GWOW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 11:30 PM
  #19
shadow1
Registered User
 
shadow1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 11,267
vCash: 1210
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trottier View Post
The thread opener mentioned players traded both before and after '94. Perhaps if you had taken five seconds, you would have noticed that I referenced only the meme popular around here about NYR and the moves they made in order to win a Cup in '94. Learn to connect the dots.

The fact that you suggest that "Brain" Noonan was insignifcant in the Cup run verifies that you likely weren't even on the earth (or following the sport) at the time. Talk about lack of substance.
You didn't reference anything, you just went off on a selfcomplacent tirade about the existence of this thread.

I didn't say Brian Noonan was "insignifcant." I didn't say anything about him other than that he was traded for Tony Amonte.


Last edited by shadow1: 02-11-2012 at 11:47 PM.
shadow1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-12-2012, 10:55 AM
  #20
Tawnos
Moderator
BoH Mod Only
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 11,162
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trottier View Post
From strictly a transactional standpoint, you may have a point. But transactions are made for to improve a team. To win.

And ridding itself of JVB, solid as he was, was a superb roster move, as it also ridded any goaletending issue (as there was prior). There was now a clear #1. And that #1 helped lead them to a Cup the very next season. End justified the means.
Plus, Lidster may have been at the end of his line, but he was an instrumental player in the finals after being inserted due to injury.

Tawnos is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-12-2012, 11:01 AM
  #21
Tawnos
Moderator
BoH Mod Only
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 11,162
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD View Post
... Not quite. Turcotte doesn't really work, and one would like a bit more toughness overall on the bottom-6. That first line has the potential to be absolutely filthy, though. Very good defense as well, though I'm not 100% convinced that Patrick could be a second pairing guy on a top-club at that point.
I agree about the toughness at the bottom. You could also, if you want, take Turcotte out... put Kovalev back at center on the 2nd line like he often was in 94, shift Amonte to RW and insert Niklas Sundstrom into the lineup, shifting your left wings around as needed.

As for James Patrick, I actually think he was a good 2nd pairing defenseman for another 5 years after he was dealt in 1993, but as a defensive defenseman rather than an offensive one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by German Way of War View Post
Lots of 10-8 games with that lineup.
But I thought Richter would've bailed them out from that

Yeah, tons of offense from the forwards there and, while I think the D would've been fine, I'm not convinced at the defensive ability of the forwards there. Although, if you shifted Nemchinov or Marchant to the wings and put Sundstrom with them, that would've been a borderline elite shutdown line during that part of the 90s.

Tawnos is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-12-2012, 01:22 PM
  #22
optimus2861
Registered User
 
optimus2861's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Bedford NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,582
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadow1 View Post
Amonte: Stephane Matteau and Brain Noonan. Yes, Matteau scored the biggest goal of the Rangers cup run, but otherwise was nothing special. Like Noonan and Tikkanen, Matteau found himself in St. Louis by the time 95-96 rolled around.
Matteau and Noonan were the very definition of "Keenan's boys", the players he'd acquire anywhere he went. Matteau finally escaped him after St. Louis, but Noonan went to Vancouver as well. I think Keenan would have traded just about anybody short of Gretzky to get a hold of one or both of these guys. Hell, he might even have traded Gretzky for them if given the chance .

optimus2861 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-12-2012, 01:31 PM
  #23
vadim sharifijanov
Registered User
 
vadim sharifijanov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 8,710
vCash: 500
^ poor iron mike must have been devastated that they couldn't also squeeze igor kravchuk out of chicago in the amonte deal.

vadim sharifijanov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-12-2012, 06:05 PM
  #24
mco543
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 260
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by optimus2861 View Post
Matteau and Noonan were the very definition of "Keenan's boys", the players he'd acquire anywhere he went. Matteau finally escaped him after St. Louis, but Noonan went to Vancouver as well. I think Keenan would have traded just about anybody short of Gretzky to get a hold of one or both of these guys. Hell, he might even have traded Gretzky for them if given the chance .
Keenan also dragged Matteau to Florida during one of his runs here. So much like in The Godfather just when Matteau thought he was out Keenan pulled him back in.

mco543 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-12-2012, 07:09 PM
  #25
Jinsell
Registered User
 
Jinsell's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 611
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
^ poor iron mike must have been devastated that they couldn't also squeeze igor kravchuk out of chicago in the amonte deal.
Kravchuk played for Edmonton by that point. I wouldn't doubt Iron Mike inquired about him when he traded Todd Marchant for Craig MacTavish.

Jinsell 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 01:53 PM.

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

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