The Flames have had some bad history. i.e the Gilmour trade (and a couple others under the Reisbrough regime, the bad first round picks (Dingman, Mattsson, Tkaczuk and Fata), but it has taken a turn for the better. Button introduced good drafting and now Sutter will really turn things around. Its the fans that give the team any kind of fiscal respectibility.
But the Islanders ahve to be the worst managed and run (at least in the past decade. Early pick draft flops (i.e. Scissons), bad trades (we all know these ones), giving players like Yashin big number, long term contracts. This team went from being unable to afford Palffy to paying Yashin, Peca and Hamrlik huge amounts of money. What's up with that?
Well the Islanders did change ownership between those signings didn't they?
But at least the Flames can be near the top of the league in something
On-ice success doesn't even enter into the equation for you?
What's the overall satisfaction level of those fans? Don't they regularly boo their own players? Don't you think they'd like to see their team back in the playoffs one of these years?
Seems to me that an organization that's in the entertainment business should give its customers something to cheer about to be considered well-run.
See I disagree with you on this one. You tell me if you have unlimited funds if you wouldn't be doing what the Rangers are. Kovalev was a good trade. Lindros was as well. Bure at the time was too. See where i
am going with this.
I don't like the Rangers at all, but to compare thier mangement with the Hawks or the Bruins...its not close. at least the mangement gives the Rangers a chance to win. Unlike the Hawks who I have no clue in hell what they are trying to prove.
Rangers spend too much money, they trade thier draft picks away. I agree on both, but look at the damned roster. Thats a team that should be top 4 in the East. I put the Rangers and the Pens almost in the same boat. I would not put either in the worst of the lot because there are other factors that come into play (Pens - surviving) (Rangers - apeasing thier fans)
When I think of bad managment its the ones that just don't give a crap about the on ice product just the bottom line. And thats the Black Hawks
This team went from being unable to afford Palffy to paying Yashin, Peca and Hamrlik huge amounts of money. What's up with that?
Well, I don't think any Isles fan can justify Yashin's contract, but Peca/Hamrlik is not a good comparison.
Peca makes 4.25 this season, is our captain and can get 60 points a season while leading the defense. That's worth 4.25.
The Hamrlik arguement is worse. I believe he makes 3.6 this year for his 9g, 32a performance. I'd take 2 Hamrlik's and one Kenny Jonsson every day of the week over a Chris Pronger and Rob Blake.
The Rangers make a ton. The building is never empty, and players want to play there. Hardly 3 things that happen with a terribly managed team.
The Rangers are a badly managed team. Yes, they do turn a profit most likely. Yes, they do generate a lot of revenue, but most of this is due to how lucrative their market is to begin with.
If they were able to put out a better on ice product, they would be making a heck of a lot more money. This is why they are poorly managed. They are not maximizing the income from their franchise.
In fact, if you tried to rank each team by looking at what each team could be making with optimal management each year versus what they are making, the Rangers would probably top the list with the biggest gap. The only team I could see competing would be the Blackhawks. This is why they are always considered to be among the worst managed teams.
The Hamrlik arguement is worse. I believe he makes 3.6 this year for his 9g, 32a performance. I'd take 2 Hamrlik's and one Kenny Jonsson every day of the week over a Chris Pronger and Rob Blake.
Should be "2 Hamrlik's and one KJ every day of the week over a Chris Pronger OR Rob Blake".
The Leafs should be here too.
1) They have one of the oldest teams in the league and a crappy farm system.
2) Problems in upper management(Quinn,New GM's etc.)
3) They have one of the highest payrolls and are no where close to winning a cup.
4) Player conficts (Corson, Tucker, Nolan......cheapshotters....Domi, Marchment)
5) Every year they increase theie ticket prices.
The Leafs should be here too.
1) They have one of the oldest teams in the league and a crappy farm system.
2) Problems in upper management(Quinn,New GM's etc.)
3) They have one of the highest payrolls and are no where close to winning a cup.
4) Player conficts (Corson, Tucker, Nolan......cheapshotters....Domi, Marchment)
5) Every year they increase theie ticket prices.
I love to hate the leafs as much as anyone, but they have a few things going for them.
1) They are pretty successful in the playoffs.
2) As badly mismanaged as they are, they are light years beyond their Harold Ballard years
3) Ticket price increases are actually sign of good management, as it indicates that their fan base has increasing levels of satisfaction with their success
They are not a model franchise by any means, but there are worse out there.
if you look at the rangers' trades, from a pure hockey perspective, i believe they'd look like an outstanding organization. drafting isn't that bad either.
however, when you make this many trades and just kind of expect it all to work out, and no chemistry is built and players that flourished elsewhere suck on your team, well it can get bleak.
i think with a good camp the players will get to know each other and a good start will get them going. having bure out of the equation, and not popping in and out of the lineup, will help.
The Blues would have qualified for the worst managed team a few years ago. Who can forget their signing of Stevens from the Caps as an RFA followed by the signing of Shanahan from the Devils as an RFA the next year...which resulted in the league awarding the Devils Stevens as compensation. Then there was the negotiations with Mike Keenan that took place while Keenan was coaching the Rangers to the Stanley Cup. Then there was the Gretzky trade...And backing up a few more years, there was the year they did not bother to participate in the NHL draft.
Laurie, Pleau, and Quenneville have stabilized the franchise but when it comes to bad management, the Blues have a past that at least equals that of any team in the post-expansion era.
What I don't get is how the Rangers make so much money. I know a couple hockey fans in NYC and all of them tell me that nobody in NYC cares about hockey. They show highschool bball highlights before NHL scores on the nightly sports news.
I guess they must sell alot of tickets but it's not like the can selll anymore then other teams who sell out every night.
What I don't get is how the Rangers make so much money. I know a couple hockey fans in NYC and all of them tell me that nobody in NYC cares about hockey. They show highschool bball highlights before NHL scores on the nightly sports news.
I guess they must sell alot of tickets but it's not like the can selll anymore then other teams who sell out every night.
WTF do the Rangers get all that dough to burn?
I think a lot of it comes from luxury box revenue, although, I don't think it's a guarantee that they are rolling in money though. Their recent ineptitude has probably cost them a lot of money. They are willing to spend though, since if they ever do put together a winner, they will start seeing the cash roll in. New York is a lucractive market, and the Rangers are the primary team. They are probably making a profit right, but it's probably not what you would expect, given how high their budget seems to be.
how the new york islanders can compete despite trading away bertuzzi, salo, spezza, chara, palffy, mccabe, etc. with limited return is amazing to me. all those guys still on the team... they would be perrenial contenders.
of course not being owned by con-artists that are worth less than a million would have helped them in that regard...
how the new york islanders can compete despite trading away bertuzzi, salo, spezza, chara, palffy, mccabe, etc. with limited return is amazing to me. all those guys still on the team... they would be perrenial contenders.
Part of that is obviously true, but the return in those is Yashin, Peca, Scatchard, Martinek, etc.
how the new york islanders can compete despite trading away bertuzzi, salo, spezza, chara, palffy, mccabe, etc. with limited return is amazing to me. all those guys still on the team... they would be perrenial contenders.
of course not being owned by con-artists that are worth less than a million would have helped them in that regard...
drafting Dipietro over Gaborik, Klesla, Heatley while having Luongo still then trading him WITH Jokinen to Florida
Milbury then has the balls to brag about it on TV, absolute joke
imagine having 2 lines of:
Bertuzzi-Jokinen-Heatley
Chara-Hamrlik
Peca-Spezza-Palffy
Niinima-McCabe
Luongo in net
second guessing is easy to do specially in hind sight but this is just ridiculous specially the drafting stupidity
second guessing is easy to do specially in hind sight but this is just ridiculous specially the drafting stupidity
true. milbury has made some questionable moves but overall it has inexplicably worked out...
i remember the luongo trade specifically giving me a WTF bell - a servicable young goalie going for a riskier one, but it could have been a pure genius move too.
i'll give mad mike this - he does not hesitate when he sees a need. i think honestly most of the problems of the late nineties had more to do with ownership. even the yashin trade i bet was a move by wang to shore up fan confidence by spending big to win. yashin hasn't honestly played that badly, but the trade price will become very high this season i think...
I don't even have to read the thread: Blackhawks, bar none, end of conversation. Even the Rangers are well-managed compared to this team. Isles? At least they make trades to get respectable players, rather than to get rid of respectable players at all costs.
It would be one thing if the Hawks made the personnel moves they do, because they were playing in a dank, old arena like the Nassua Coliseum or the Igloo... but they're in the friggin UC. Luxury boxes and glass seats galore! The same arena that got the Bulls 3 rings worth of salary and stardom. Nevertheless, Bill Wirtz finds a way to fu*k things up on a yearly basis.
There's a simple way to remember this sad fact of nature in the NHl: Wirtz is the Worst. Repeat it early and often.
Hopefully Ruutu doesn't turn into a star, or he'll be traded in two years. OK, three years.
words GLEN SATHER, he is close to being the worst gm in the league with the biggest payroll as well. His moves have all been shortsighted none the less
The Blackhawks are in a different league. The Rangers have been superbly irresponsible financially in the last few years (and generally inept) but they have won the Stanley Cup in the last 10 years.
Chicago hasn't won the Cup since '61 (the longest drought for ANY team), could well finish bottom 2 this year and have been mismanaged for decade after decade. Oh and you cant see any home games because they arent televised.
I think the NY franchises both are candidates, esp. the Rangers for throwing money around and not developing a core for these guys to compliment. Milbury's gaffes need no repeating; #37 summed it up perfectly.
Chicago may be on the upswing here, with guys like Ruutu, Bell, and Arnason in place, and Babchuk, Leighton and Seabrook on the way, they could at least have a competitive core to build on. I like their future, at least until these guys can get more money that is.
