If you look at the guys brought in during 94, most of them had either been to the Finals with Keenan in Chicago (Larmer, Matteau, Noonan, Gilbert) or won it all with Edmonton multiple times (MacT, Anderson).
I haven't read the book but Keenan wanted to get rid of Leetch and trade him for Chelios, Neil Smith said no, and Bob Gutkowski had to stop all of the insanity and fighting.
Keenan hated Gartner because he wasn't enough of a grinder, and also hated Patrick and Turcotte for the same reason. His dislike of Patrick went back to the 1987 Canada Cup Series where he benched him. Early in the 1994 season the Rangers lost a game to the expansion Ducks and Keenan flipped out during the next practice, broke a stick over the boards, and blamed Turcotte and Patrick. That was pretty much the end of those two.
There was an ESPN article in 2002 where Tony Amonte said Keenan called him into a room, listed all of the players on the Rangers in order of most importance with Amonte being next to last and asked him to explain why he was where he was on the chart. It took Amonte a year and a half to recover from Keenan's taunting and insulting.
These are only some of the stories.
1994 actually had many forgotten heroes. It's almost Hollywood like about how many people played a role.
1. Craig Patrick-Drafted Leetch
2. Joe Buccino-Former caddy for Esposito who became a trainer and interim GM who ran the 1989 draft before Neil Smith took over and while he missed Lidstrom he selected Rice and Debrusk who were part of the most important trade in Rangers history (well up to this point). He was let go when Smith was hired.
3. Guy LaFleur-Smith let him walk and got a 5th rounder as compensation that turned into...Sergei Zubov.
4. Stanley Jaffe-Former Hollywood Producer who was running the Rangers in 93 and hired Keenan when Smith was hesitant to do so. He was let go before the 94 season. Interesting enough, he was trying to hire Cliff Fletcher to replace Smith the year before so lucky for us that didn't work out.
5. Most important; Bob Gutkowski-Was Smith and Keenan's boss and even though there was a lot of insanity going on, he at least was able to calm things down enough before Keenan almost pulled an Esposito and traded away everyone.
Honorable mention: Larry Bertuzzi-There might be a day when Scott Howson surpasses him for rejecting the Nash offer (let's hope) but this was the guy who ruled that the Flyers completed the Lindros trade before the Rangers. Too much was given up, the Rangers would have never won a Cup if that trade goes through. It clearly helped Quebec/Colorado win one of course.
I agree with everything you wrote except for the last point. If Lindros came to NY in 1992 and teamed with Messier, his carrer would have had a completely different projectory. The Rangers could have bouight all the reinforcements they needed. I, as well as several of my hockey freiends, believe the Rangers would have won multiple Cups with the two skating on the same team.
He's not a bad guy. He's got a personality and a sense of humor. He's just an extreme Type-A personality, and quite frankly the nice guy approach of Roger Neilson didnt work.
The Rangers wanted to be treated like men. Keenan wanted the Rangers to be winners. When the Rangers had half-assed practices and guys took shifts off, Keenan snapped. He had a really messy divorce, so he was able to invest his entire life to the Rangers.
I always liked Keenan. When I heard he was hired, I did an Irish jig.
I don't think he was soft insomuch as he never shied from contact. He would take a hit to make a play. He was not the kind of guy who was going to throw his body around. But I don't think he was soft.
I agree with that. I guess I don't recall the politics of things back then. I was 16 when they won the cup, and had been a fan for about 4 years (when I started really following sports)
Gartner never seemed soft at all, to me. Until this year, I think Gabby was softer than Gartner. Gabby has really come into his own in that regard, this year.
I remember thinking how nuts all those trades seemed at the time. Thank god it all worked out.
Well, it was kinda like 1992. Smith made two minor moves, because in 1991, his deadline deal somehow derailed the season.
If the Rangers lose in the 1st or 2nd round, expect trades in the offseason.
If they lose in the CF or SCF or win the SC, expect deals at next years deadline.
This is a different era of the NHL. Not as easy to trade capp'd $$ and the Rangers are loaded with bottom 6 guys. Those types of players land you different bottom 6 guys. It's all a gamble to see who's bottom 6 guys can over perform at just the right time....
Here is another book I recommend. If you haven't read Miesel's Losing the Edge, read this one first. It is a very good read. There is great stuff about the Lindros trade. It is called Broadway Blues by Frank Brown and it almost ends where Losing the Edge begins.
Now I am making a disclaimer here so don't kill me but hear me out. I certainly will not complain about 1994. I am a little older so I remember the deadline in 94 and the playoffs. I bought the Ranger DVD with the Devils and Canucks series and part of me was relieved that the Rangers had bigger players for the physical game the Devils and the Canucks played. However, I was thinking about it recently and was wondering if those trades HADN'T occurred, we still may have won the cup. Keep in mind the Conference and Stanley Cup finals were 7 game series with both game 7s decided by a goal.
Now the Rangers dominated the Devils that 93-94 regular season going 6-0. Yet they played us a lot tighter in the playoffs. I think what happened was the trades made the Rangers a slower team. The Rangers were fast but not as fast as they were with Amonte and Gartner. Gartner was the fastest player in the NHL at the time and Amonte wasn't exactly slow. Speed can nullify the trap. We certainly were a slower team with Glenn Anderson, MacTavish, Noonan, and Matteau.
Again, I am not totally convinced myself but sometimes "what ifs" are fun. Maybe the Rangers can beat the Devils in a shorter series, maybe the Rangers lose...Either way, I can't complain.
White Plains Batman, I loved your post. Very good read.
Here's some insight from Neil Smith about the trades made in 94:
Quote:
But Smith and Keenan had their eyes on the big prize -- even if they didn't necessarily agree on who could get them there.
"I liked Amonte and Mike Gartner, but I wound up moving Gartner for Glenn Anderson because we wanted another experienced playoff guy," Smith said. "We used Amonte to get Noonan and Matteau. I didn't like the trade at the time, but it gave us some experienced, veteran guys that Keenan liked.
"I also wanted MacTavish because I didn't think we were strong on faceoffs. We sent Marchant (to Edmonton) for him."
.................................................. ..........................................
Smith knew he paid a big price, but championships are forever -- especially when you haven't won one in 54 years.
"We weren't built to be a dynasty," he said. "It was a team that wasn't winning the Cup in their prime. Most of them were later on in their careers. A dynasty is built from a team that's just peaking and happens to win, and throughout their peak they keep winning or coming close to winning. The Islanders and Edmonton were like that. We were built to win the Cup and try to adjust from there and see if you can ever do it again.
"I knew that that team had to go down. I had to use up every single bit of currency to get that team positioned the way it was. It was go for broke, do it. I'm sure that if you told Ranger fans in the summer of 1992 or 1993 that, 'We're going to have to make some hard decisions and trade some of the future, and you may not like what you'll see in the late '90s, but you'll be Stanley Cup winners, you'll experience that -- Rangers fans would have traded 20 years of non-playoffs for that."
Noonan and Matteau weren't just big bodies. They were real good along the walls and in the corners. They could both pk and they were both good for 15+ goals per year. Both of them with those intangibles were more than willing to fit into the roles that Keenan had for them. Amonte had a lot more talent but had consistency issues not altogether unlike Dubinsky right now--though Amonte much more dangerous and Dubinsky more gritty. Basically at least for a short stretch of time Keenan was able to solidify his lineup in terms of how the forwards fit within the teams structure--with maybe the exception of Kovalev. The other thing is Keenan didn't like Amonte and he had coached Matteau and Noonan so he knew what kind of players he was getting.
He didn't like Gartner either. Glenn Anderson had the Edmonton ties--Messier, Graves, Beukeboom, Lowe, Tikkanen. They had all won cups together. Enough said there.
To me a trade that mattered even more came before that--Larmer for Patrick and Turcotte. Keenan definitely saw Patrick and Turcotte as soft. Larmer was a great player. Superb instincts both offensively and defensively. Not the best skater though. Stepan reminds me of Larmer.
Noonan and Matteau weren't just big bodies. They were real good along the walls and in the corners. They could both pk and they were both good for 15+ goals per year. Both of them with those intangibles were more than willing to fit into the roles that Keenan had for them. Amonte had a lot more talent but had consistency issues not altogether unlike Dubinsky right now--though Amonte much more dangerous and Dubinsky more gritty. Basically at least for a short stretch of time Keenan was able to solidify his lineup in terms of how the forwards fit within the teams structure--with maybe the exception of Kovalev. The other thing is Keenan didn't like Amonte and he had coached Matteau and Noonan so he knew what kind of players he was getting.
He didn't like Gartner either. Glenn Anderson had the Edmonton ties--Messier, Graves, Beukeboom, Lowe, Tikkanen. They had all won cups together. Enough said there.
To me a trade that mattered even more came before that--Larmer for Patrick and Turcotte. Keenan definitely saw Patrick and Turcotte as soft. Larmer was a great player. Superb instincts both offensively and defensively. Not the best skater though. Stepan reminds me of Larmer.
Good post.
Noonan had a huge playoff for Keenan in 1992. Matteau was what the Rangers lacked -- a big body in front of the net. Smith was always keen on a at least one guy who would cause havoc in front of the net. He had that in John Ogrodnick in 1990. He thought he had that in Tim Kerr in 1992 but Kerr at that point was a shell of his Flyer days.
Having Matteau and Graves on the top-6 was a nightmare for opposing defenses.
Larmer was an all star. It amazed me all he cost was Turcotte and Patrick. And I agree about the Stepan comparison 100 pct.
This is a different era of the NHL. Not as easy to trade capp'd $$ and the Rangers are loaded with bottom 6 guys. Those types of players land you different bottom 6 guys. It's all a gamble to see who's bottom 6 guys can over perform at just the right time....
I wasnt talking about that.
I was referencing how Smith was very happy with the 1992 team and only made two depth moves. Which is what both Sather and Torts said about the 2012 deadline. Cap or no cap, the fact is that the 1992 GM and the 2012 GM felt the best move to make was to not make one at all.
Noonan had a huge playoff for Keenan in 1992. Matteau was what the Rangers lacked -- a big body in front of the net. Smith was always keen on a at least one guy who would cause havoc in front of the net. He had that in John Ogrodnick in 1990. He thought he had that in Tim Kerr in 1992 but Kerr at that point was a shell of his Flyer days.
Having Matteau and Graves on the top-6 was a nightmare for opposing defenses.
Larmer was an all star. It amazed me all he cost was Turcotte and Patrick. And I agree about the Stepan comparison 100 pct.
Larmer was a great all-around player. I think he gets overlooked in all the tribute to that team. Except for his unique penalty shot move...
My memory is hazy on this, but I'm pretty sure Larmer was holding out for a new contract with Chicago, and was eventually traded to the Rangers about 1/4 way into the season, probably why he cost so little.
He also wore my favorite jersey number (stemming from my username) and chewed gum on the ice, blowing bubbles and all. Great player.
The Gartner deal I didn't like, but it wasn't an "awful" trade IMO.
The Amonte deal was, and still is, the deal I had a problem with. Again, it's really hard to argue with a defense of "maybes," but I think Chicago fleeced us on that deal. It's not like Matteau and Noonan were even considered the best checking wingers in the game. I think Smith could justify it to himself with the hope that maybe Matteau tapped into his potential and became a 25 goal scorer, because I believe he was still only about 24 at the time.
With that said Keenan, I always thought Keenan walked a fine line between being the guy who won us a cup and being the guy who set this organization back for years (which ironically he became almost everywhere else he went after NY). In my mind, Keenan was always the nuclear option. Just as likely as to bring about total destruction as he was to bring about the desired outcome.
As a coach, the word on Keenan was that he was borderline mental, in some cases, not so borderline. I really think the difference was Messier, who was the one player, perhaps in the entire NHL, who could overcome Keenan's missteps enough to deliver a championship. Evidence of that coming during the series against the Devils where it seemed that Keenan's neurotic side was dangerously close to blowing the whole thing.
It's one reason why Messier will always get my vote as the greatest Ranger who ever lived. To me, it wasn't just what he did, it's what he did to those around him. It's how he helped Brian Leetch into the Brian Leetch everyone remembers, helped Adam Graves become ADAM GRAVES, etc. etc. etc. There were other guys who played more games in the jersey, scored more points, or had more natural talent. However, Messier was the guy who brought everything together for this team and was probably the only guy who could've done it.
Larmer was a great all-around player. I think he gets overlooked in all the tribute to that team. Except for his unique penalty shot move...
My memory is hazy on this, but I'm pretty sure Larmer was holding out for a new contract with Chicago, and was eventually traded to the Rangers about 1/4 way into the season, probably why he cost so little.
He also wore my favorite jersey number (stemming from my username) and chewed gum on the ice, blowing bubbles and all. Great player.
He was also 32/33 in a day when that was the equivalent of 35/36 today, and he had a back that was starting to give him problems. The back was also one of the reasons he only played one more season after the Cup.
Still, while history makes it look one-sided, it wasn't such an easy thing to claim 18/19 years ago. Turcotte was only 25, already had a couple of 30 goal seasons and was a solid second line center. James Patrick, while never having lived up to his full potential, was 30 years old and a regular 50-60 point defenseman.
It's one of the reasons Hartford was inclined to also include Kypreos, Barry Richter and a pick.
He was also 32/33 in a day when that was the equivalent of 35/36 today, and he had a back that was starting to give him problems. The back was also one of the reasons he only played one more season after the Cup.
Still, while history makes it look one-sided, it wasn't such an easy thing to claim 18/19 years ago. Turcotte was only 25, already had a couple of 30 goal seasons and was a solid second line center. James Patrick, while never having lived up to his full potential, was 30 years old and a regular 50-60 point defenseman.
It's one of the reasons Hartford was inclined to also include Kypreos, Barry Richter and a pick.
Larmer was instrumental though in getting the best out of Kovalev in that playoff season. He was constantly yapping and nagging at him. For a forward Larmer's positioning on the other side of the puck was always superb. He was always picking off passes and starting counter attacks. It always seemed to me he could have made a terrific coach. He was also more of a goal scorer than say Stepan who is more of a playmaker. He was a player who could bear down. He was a player who could finish plays.
The reason Larmer retired was Coilin Campbell. He couldn't stand Soupie and quietly asked for a trade. From God's mouth to your ears. After he retired he worked in the NHLPA for a number of years. Extremely popular and respected throughout the league.
The reason Larmer retired was Coilin Campbell. He coiuldn't stand Soupie and quietly asked for a trade. From God's mouth to your ears. After he retired he worked in the NHLPA for a number of hyears. extremely popular and respected throughout the league.
Yeah, I remember Smith was begging Larmer to come out of retirement in 1995-96. It was such torture thinking he could come back. Larmer was the Doug Jarvis of his era, so I could see him being a liitle burnt out and a little de-motivated after winning his first Cup to never want to play again.
The reason Larmer retired was Coilin Campbell. He coiuldn't stand Soupie and quietly asked for a trade. From God's mouth to your ears. After he retired he worked in the NHLPA for a number of hyears. extremely popular and respected throughout the league.
bobbop - You may be right but I don't remember Larmer being frustrated with Campbell? Maybe i'll try and Google that but he only played for Campbell as a head coach for the strike-shortened season. It doesn't appear to be a lot of time. Unless it stemmed back to Collie as an Assistant coach.
The reason Larmer retired was Coilin Campbell. He coiuldn't stand Soupie and quietly asked for a trade. From God's mouth to your ears. After he retired he worked in the NHLPA for a number of years. Extremely popular and respected throughout the league.
Soupie is just not very well-liked guy. It's comical how him and Burke keep staying employed around the league.
As for Larmer's back, it was a problem that originally became a bigger issue during the 92-93 season, which is one of the reasons Chicago was a little hesitant to commit to Larmer.
Always liked Larmer, he wasn't a very big guy, 5'10, maybe 5'11, about 180 pounds, wasn't a very fast guy, but he was a smart player who knew how to do the little things.
Perhaps one of the best examples is a photo from 1994 called "The Moment." MSG and players are going nuts, and there's Larmer, in the background, with his guy pinned to the wall.
The Gartner deal I didn't like, but it wasn't an "awful" trade IMO.
The Amonte deal was, and still is, the deal I had a problem with. Again, it's really hard to argue with a defense of "maybes," but I think Chicago fleeced us on that deal. It's not like Matteau and Noonan were even considered the best checking wingers in the game. I think Smith could justify it to himself with the hope that maybe Matteau tapped into his potential and became a 25 goal scorer, because I believe he was still only about 24 at the time.
With that said Keenan, I always thought Keenan walked a fine line between being the guy who won us a cup and being the guy who set this organization back for years (which ironically he became almost everywhere else he went after NY). In my mind, Keenan was always the nuclear option. Just as likely as to bring about total destruction as he was to bring about the desired outcome.
As a coach, the word on Keenan was that he was borderline mental, in some cases, not so borderline. I really think the difference was Messier, who was the one player, perhaps in the entire NHL, who could overcome Keenan's missteps enough to deliver a championship. Evidence of that coming during the series against the Devils where it seemed that Keenan's neurotic side was dangerously close to blowing the whole thing.
It's one reason why Messier will always get my vote as the greatest Ranger who ever lived. To me, it wasn't just what he did, it's what he did to those around him. It's how he helped Brian Leetch into the Brian Leetch everyone remembers, helped Adam Graves become ADAM GRAVES, etc. etc. etc. There were other guys who played more games in the jersey, scored more points, or had more natural talent. However, Messier was the guy who brought everything together for this team and was probably the only guy who could've done it.
I dont think Keenan takes the job without Messier being there. Same thing with St. Louis. The minute he got there he surrounded himself with Guy Carbonneau, Al Macinnis, and brought over Tikkanen, Gilbert, Lidster and Anderson. Not to mention Hull and Shanahan were already there.
He needed a strong room. I think he acknowledged that he was certifiably insane with his words and how he was bi-polar at times. But you have to admit, there certainly was a method to his madness.
Soupie is just not very well-liked guy. It's comical how him and Burke keep staying employed around the league.
As for Larmer's back, it was a problem that originally became a bigger issue during the 92-93 season, which is one of the reasons Chicago was a little hesitant to commit to Larmer.
Always liked Larmer, he wasn't a very big guy, 5'10, maybe 5'11, about 180 pounds, wasn't a very fast guy, but he was a smart player who knew how to do the little things.
Perhaps one of the best examples is a photo from 1994 called "The Moment." MSG and players are going nuts, and there's Larmer, in the background, with his guy pinned to the wall.
The simple and short answer is Keenan hated Gartner.
I think it was more than that. Certainly Keenan wanted players that didn't fit his style off his team, Turcotte, Amonte, Patrick, Gartner, etc. That said Smith's MO was to import Edmonton's dynasty at all costs which he continued after 94 and lead to his demise i.e. McSorley, Kurri, Churla. After Beukeboom this team was desperate for the next Beuk, always look for that tough crease clearing blue liner. Too bad Norstrom was having a hugely successful career out west.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zil
You forgot Zubov and Nedved for Robitaille and Samuelsson.
Norstrom Zubov added to any blueline for a decade would have been killer pair! There's a reason why no organization lets Neal Smith near them any more, the guy is a buffoon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway
That book is the reason I'm disgusted every time I see Keenan involved with this organization or on MSG.
I didn't even need to wait for the book to come out. I started hating him when he left for St. Louis. Guy is a total megalomaniac, can't stand him.
It's a good thing I love a lot of the the players from the 94 team because I'm not fond of the coach or the GM of the time. Every time I watch a Chicago broadcast, Eddie O reminds me of the Black Aces and for some reason, I always like him as a player.
