HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Just an idea...If NYR gets S.Crosby

View Poll Results: If the deal is there move Crosby or still keep.....
Keep #1 overall pick no matter the deal 60 72.29%
If the deal is fair or good/excellent make the move 22 26.51%
Dont know, not sure. 1 1.20%
Voters: 83. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-06-2005, 05:40 PM
  #1
AG9NK35DT8*
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Bronx/Queens, NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 1,822
vCash: 500
Just an idea...If NYR gets S.Crosby

After you vote on the poll, please give your opinion on weather you would do the deal or not and why. IMO one player does not make a team but to get lets say 5 top prospects for one its worth it. To me atleast.

Lets say NYR gets the #1 pick in 2005 which is obviousley Sidney Crosby. Now since NYR does need alot of 1st line/2nd line/ top pairing D prospects he would smart tomake a move. Since NYR does not have many top 2 line Fwds would it be smart to trade the #1 pick to a team with lets say the #3 or #4 spot along with other prospects and picks.

Let me give an example.

To NYR: #3 or #4 overall in 2005, #1 in 2006, 2 top prospects and a 2nd rounder in 2005

To Whoever: #1 overall ** Crosby }, 3rd rounder in 2005/06 and future considerations ** lets say a 5th -8th round pick in 2006 or 2007 }

I mean for the #1 overall pick teams will be willing to give both arms and both legs with what ever else to get him. With this #1 overall it could help NYR jump ahead by a ton prospect wise, with giving up one great prospect and a couple very late round picks NYR could vastly improve from having 2 if even 3 top line propsect to having 5 or 6 top line fwds and / or top #2 or #3 defenseman prsopects. If I was a NYR GM I would take as much as I can to get this kid. If your not getting top prospects than no deal but if a deal like the one I made above falls through I say Sather would be out of his mind not to make a move. So by looking at my exanple of the type of deal I would pull if I had the #1 pick do you think Crosby is worth more or is he worth less.

And give you opinion on a team that you might like to trade with and what you would want.

AG9NK35DT8* is offline  
Old
03-06-2005, 05:58 PM
  #2
Barnaby
Registered User
 
Barnaby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Port Jefferson, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,500
vCash: 500
Not gonna happen.... whoever gets that pick will keep ot barring a Lindros-esque offer. Washington wasn't trading AO, and Crosby is even higher regarded. Noone is trading Crosby.... he will bring in $$$$$$$ and probably be a Sakic caliber player or maybe even better who will be the leader of his club.

Barnaby is offline  
Old
03-06-2005, 06:03 PM
  #3
NYFAN
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 361
vCash: 500
Crosby in a Ranger uniform , brings everyone back when the league resumes play. No way you trade that pick! If he goes to any of the big market teams it is a shot in the arm for the NHL period! He is considered to be way ahead of all the other prospects in this draft, you don't trade that away, unless you get a fools ransom in return. We have already bottomed out, so we keep the pick, draft Sidney, and still suck enough to draft in the top 10 for several more years. All the while improving, but getting to watch the Sidney Crosby show at the garden!

NYFAN is offline  
Old
03-06-2005, 06:16 PM
  #4
NYR469
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 5,785
vCash: 500
it would depend what other teams will offer, i'd do backflips to have a chance to get him but everyone feels the same way and it is possible that someone could make you an offer that can't be refused.

NYR469 is offline  
Old
03-06-2005, 06:17 PM
  #5
Burberry Manning
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Summit NJ-The Elite
Country: United States
Posts: 2,053
vCash: 500
It would be a HUGE blunder by Ranger's management if they dealt Crosby, from both a marketing and a performance perspective. What is it that the Rangers are loaded with right now? Mediocre depth players that can play on the 2nd or 3rd line. What is it that our organization sorely lacks? Elite talents. It is a HELL of alot easier to pick up mediocre to good players than to get your hands on a future great like Crosby. We saw how easy it was for Sather to stockpile all those 2nds and late 1sts, but he didn't have a chance to even sniff Ovechkin and Crosby is better. If you give me 5 drafts then I can produce 5 good prospects, no doubt, but I wont be able to give you a Crosby.

For all of this talk about super prospects, it's often lost just how good Philadelphia made out in the Lindros trade. He was arguably the best player in the NHL for a good amount of years, he led them to the Stanley Cup Finals, won a Hart Trophy, made HoFers out of linemates, rejuvenated Philly hockey and out it on the map, built them a new arena. If it wasn't for an injury bug that no one could have suspected he would be going down as an all-time great and probably would have won a cup in Philly by now. It really wasn't as lopsided a deal as folks made it out to be.

Burberry Manning is offline  
Old
03-06-2005, 06:18 PM
  #6
Burberry Manning
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Summit NJ-The Elite
Country: United States
Posts: 2,053
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR469
it would depend what other teams will offer, i'd do backflips to have a chance to get him but everyone feels the same way and it is possible that someone could make you an offer that can't be refused.
If we dont get the top overall pick than I hope the Rangers would be one of those teams to offer a king's ransom for Crosby

Burberry Manning is offline  
Old
03-06-2005, 07:12 PM
  #7
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,012
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleeding blue
It would be a HUGE blunder by Ranger's management if they dealt Crosby, from both a marketing and a performance perspective.
For all of this talk about super prospects, it's often lost just how good Philadelphia made out in the Lindros trade.
Sorry, but if you have a chance to have a Hershell Walker or Eric Lindros type trade, you make it. I do not think that any can argue who got the better deal, Philly or Colarado. IF a miracle happens and Crosby is a Rangers draft choice, and a team offers a deal that resembles what Colarado got for Lindros, you take it and run.
Having said all of that, I again repeat that it would have to be such an utter no-brainer (like the Philly/Quebec trade).

True Blue is offline  
Old
03-06-2005, 07:13 PM
  #8
Onion Boy
Registered User
 
Onion Boy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: Japan
Posts: 2,676
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
Sorry, but if you have a chance to have a Hershell Walker or Eric Lindros type trade, you make it. I do not think that any can argue who got the better deal, Philly or Colarado.
Lindros stays healthy I say Philly wins.

Onion Boy is offline  
Old
03-06-2005, 07:21 PM
  #9
NYRangers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,853
vCash: 500
Keep him, he would re-energize NYR hockey before he even played. Say he becomes a hall of famer (i know, just listen) would you have wanted him, a player that would be on your team for nearly 20 years? Or a couple of solid NHLers. We don't have the best track record either. That deal could easily backfire.

NYRangers is offline  
Old
03-06-2005, 07:50 PM
  #10
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,012
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjb3599
Lindros stays healthy I say Philly wins.
But he did not. And even if he did, a certain someone named Forsberg went to Quebec. And even if Lindros never become such a injury liability, if I were to have a team, I would take a Forsberg & Ricci on my team over a healthy Lindros any day of the week. Plus let's not forget Duchesne, Huffman, Simon & two more first rounders. No way is even a healthy Lindros worth all of that.

" Say he becomes a hall of famer (i know, just listen) would you have wanted him, a player that would be on your team for nearly 20 years? "

Quebec got a Hall of Famer as well. And they went on to win Cups, largely becuase of that trade. How many did Philly win with a healthy Lindros?

True Blue is offline  
Old
03-06-2005, 08:10 PM
  #11
rnyquist
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 646
vCash: 500
Marketing wise, the guy is right, it would be a blunder. Crosby is the biggest prospect since Lindros and it would be hard to convince a lot of the fans that the kids you're getting back will be better IF they're not name brand kids. But performance wise, I'll take a team of great players over one superstar.

rnyquist is offline  
Old
03-06-2005, 08:25 PM
  #12
dedalus
Registered User
 
dedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,215
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
Forsberg went to Quebec. And even if Lindros never become such a injury liability, if I were to have a team, I would take a Forsberg & Ricci on my team over a healthy Lindros any day of the week. Plus let's not forget Duchesne, Huffman, Simon & two more first rounders. No way is even a healthy Lindros worth all of that.

[Colorado] went on to win Cups, largely becuase of that trade. How many did Philly win with a healthy Lindros?
Thanks for saving me the trouble, TB.

Eric Lindros was a great marketing asset for the Flyers. He (and Shawn Bradley) really DID get the Wachovia Center built, but from a hockey talent standpoint, that trade was an unmitigated disaster for the Flyers.

We should thank the hockey gods for the arbitrator who ruled in Philly's favor. If the Rangers gave up the assets the Flyers did, IMO Ranger haters would still be chanting "1940!"

dedalus is offline  
Old
03-06-2005, 08:38 PM
  #13
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,012
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnyquist
Marketing wise, the guy is right, it would be a blunder. Crosby is the biggest prospect since Lindros .
Marketing, shamarketing. How did Colarado do marketing-wise? Bet those 2 Cups help. Saying someone is the biggest prospect since Lindros is wonderfull, however the best marketing available is winning Cups. Think Colarado regrets even for one second making that deal? How about the Dallas Cowboys? Think the regret Hershell Walker? And who is doing better marketing wise, Colarado (still reaping the benefits of that trade) or Philly?

True Blue is offline  
Old
03-06-2005, 09:43 PM
  #14
NYR469
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 5,785
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjb3599
Lindros stays healthy I say Philly wins.
and if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle...

you can toss out all the what if hypotheticals you want but the only thing that matters is reality and what actually happened was colorado won 2 cups and philly won squat...and you can also add the fact that the rangers won a cup because lindros was awarded to philly, had lindros been sent to the rangers the cup in 94 wouldn't have happened.

NYR469 is offline  
Old
03-06-2005, 09:55 PM
  #15
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 11,507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjb3599
Lindros stays healthy I say Philly wins.
Lemme give you a quote outta THN's great debates magazine:

"It was the goaltending, nothing more and nothing less, that prevented Eric Lindros from leading his Quebec Nordiques to a Stanley Cup championship."

That's an excerpt from the article title "What if Eric Lindros played for Quebec?" The article proceeds to give him a timeline nearly identical to that of his career in Philly, just with different names surrounding him. And Philly had the same annual weakness when Lindros was there: goaltending. I think it's fair to say that, healthy or not, Lindros wouldn't have been the straw that gave the Flyers the Cup.

Tawnos is online now  
Old
03-06-2005, 11:13 PM
  #16
Burberry Manning
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Summit NJ-The Elite
Country: United States
Posts: 2,053
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
But he did not. And even if he did, a certain someone named Forsberg went to Quebec. And even if Lindros never become such a injury liability, if I were to have a team, I would take a Forsberg & Ricci on my team over a healthy Lindros any day of the week. Plus let's not forget Duchesne, Huffman, Simon & two more first rounders. No way is even a healthy Lindros worth all of that.

" Say he becomes a hall of famer (i know, just listen) would you have wanted him, a player that would be on your team for nearly 20 years? "

Quebec got a Hall of Famer as well. And they went on to win Cups, largely becuase of that trade. How many did Philly win with a healthy Lindros?
Wait, Forsberg was the reason that Colorado won those cups? Maybe it helped to have one of the best goaltenders of all-time, Joe Sakic, and a sick defensive corps but I guess those meager assets are easy to forget. What did Forsberg's team do last year when they didn't have a HoF goaltender?

Looking back at the deal it's easy to say "WOW Peter Forsberg and all that stuff for Lindros!" but who the hell expected Peter Forsberg to develop into an NHL great and who expected Lindros to get concussed every time he took the ice. Two flukish developments led to the Avs' "winning" the trade. Did Philly make out bad? Well let's see, they at least made it to the Cup, they got a new freakin' arena built because of it, and they have been an Eastern power since the deal. It isn't Lindros' fault Bobby Clarke just gets hosed on deals and couldn't find a final piece for the Flyers.

Hey, if Sidney Crosby has the same skill that Eric Lindros had then I'd give up the same value that Philly gave and take my chances that Crosby doesn't turn out to be made of glass. I'll take a new MSG, a decade of Eastern dominance, the best player in the game, and a shot at the Cup.

Burberry Manning is offline  
Old
03-07-2005, 08:16 AM
  #17
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,012
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleeding blue
Wait, Forsberg was the reason that Colorado won those cups?
Who said that?

"What did Forsberg's team do last year when they didn't have a HoF goaltender?"

What have the Flyers done for the past 25 years, even when Lindros was healthy and on top of his game?

"Two flukish developments led to the Avs' "winning" the trade."

I would say it was more than "two flukish developments". The trade was an outright fleecing of Philadelphia. I have no idea how you can argue anything different.

"Did Philly make out bad? Well let's see, they at least made it to the Cup, they got a new freakin' arena built because of it, and they have been an Eastern power since the deal. "

This is a ridiculous argument. You cannot possibly sit there and tell me that Philly made out in that deal. Nor do I understand how you can tell me that they did not come out second best by far.
Ask any Flyer fan who got the better part of the deal. Ask any Vikings fan, who got the better part of the Hershel Walker trade.
Did Philly make out bad? I would say YES. Or maybe you think that their new freakin' arena would not be standing if instead of Lindros, they had Forsberg, Ricci, Simon, Duchesne, Huffman, Hextall & 2 first round picks. You can look at that and honestly tell me that Philly "made out"? Come on.

"It isn't Lindros' fault Bobby Clarke just gets hosed on deals and couldn't find a final piece for the Flyers. "

Maybe if he had not given away all of the above, he would have been able to.

"Hey, if Sidney Crosby has the same skill that Eric Lindros had then I'd give up the same value that Philly gave and take my chances that Crosby doesn't turn out to be made of glass."

That's fine. You are more than entitled to your opinion. But those that do not learn from history............
Don't get me wrong, I would do a backflip if Crosby wound up a Ranger. However, if offered a Walker-type or Lindros-type trade, I would take it and run and never look back. That type of trade can completely rebuild a franchise that has nothing. But understand what type of trade I am talking about. It is not everyday that such lopsided trades are offered.

"I'll take a new MSG, a decade of Eastern dominance, the best player in the game, and a shot at the Cup."

And I will take the actuall Cups that are won and much more of a dominance (an effect still felt by teams years after the trade). Colarado has been a powerhouse since that trade and are still reaping the benefits. What does Philly have to show for it? A brand-new arena? Ohhhhh........What can Philly show that Colarado can't? Or, better yet, what can Colarado show that Philly can't? The answer is pretty simple.

True Blue is offline  
Old
03-07-2005, 04:31 PM
  #18
dedalus
Registered User
 
dedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,215
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleeding blue
who the hell expected Peter Forsberg to develop into an NHL great ... Two flukish developments led to the Avs' "winning" the trade.
Do you mean other than THN who called him the best player not playing in the NHL? His development wasn't a "fluke." Plenty of people knew he had a chance to be an outstanding player, even if you didn't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bleeding blue
(1) Did Philly make out bad? Well let's see, (2) they at least made it to the Cup, (3) they got a new freakin' arena built because of it, (4) and they have been an Eastern power since the deal.
Did Quebec make out better?
1. They won two Cups
2. The Rangers aren't interested in a new arena, so that as a Crosby selling point doesn't interest me.
3. The Avalanche have been a Western power since. Well I guess we should make that an NHL power, since they've actually WON championships.

And as long as you've brought up the issue of flukes and their roles in the successes of these teams, you seem to forget or ignore the flukes on the Flyers side which played a role in their success, not least is the 19 goal scorer that Clarke acquired who turned into a 50 goal scorer. Lest we forget, Eric Desjardins was the key to the first Montreal Recchi trade. John LeClair was a widebody with decent hands who'd never scored 20 goals in his career.

Finally I can't help but laugh at your attempts to dismiss Steve Duchesne, Ron Hextall, Chris Simon, Mike Ricci, and 2 first round picks as "all that stuff" as if they played no role in Colorado's success. "All that stuff" is the single biggest reason that Colorado was able to acquire the HoF goalie you mention so prominently in your post.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bleeding blue
Hey, if Sidney Crosby has the same skill that Eric Lindros had then I'd give up the same value that Philly gave and take my chances that Crosby doesn't turn out to be made of glass. I'll take a new MSG, a decade of Eastern dominance, the best player in the game, and a shot at the Cup.
And I'll take the same MSG they currently play in, a decade of league dominance, and two championships.

And in taking all that I'll thank the hockey gods that you're not running the Rangers.

dedalus is offline  
Old
03-07-2005, 04:52 PM
  #19
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,012
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleeding blue
Hey, if Sidney Crosby has the same skill that Eric Lindros had then I'd give up the same value that Philly gave
First time I read this, I do not think that I actually paid attention. Upon further reiview, all I can say is WOW. Never in a million years did I think that ANYONE would actually voluntarily make the same trade as Philly did. I have no idea how you can even justify it.

True Blue is offline  
Old
03-07-2005, 05:24 PM
  #20
Bacchus
Registered User
 
Bacchus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Dickes B
Country: Germany
Posts: 2,444
vCash: 500
I'd definatly do a Philly-esque deal...

Bacchus is offline  
Old
03-07-2005, 05:52 PM
  #21
nyr7andcounting
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,919
vCash: 500
If we got the first pick I would trade down. I would not trade with a team in the eastern conference and I would trade down no lower than 5th or 6th in this years draft. But you have to consider what would come back to the Rangers for Crosby. You are looking at a top 5 pick in 05, a 2nd rounder this year, probably a 1st rounder in 06(which makes it 2 top 10 picks in 2 years, if not 2 top 5 picks) and 2 top line prospects. You can form the core of a team through this trade alone.

The Rangers clearly lack depth as far as top line prospects go, so I would rather make a trade and get 3 or 4 top line prospects rather than make the first pick and have 1 top line guy.

Besides, one player doesn't win a championship. For those who say the trade wasn't the reason the Avs won their cups, it was because they had so many top level players....well that is exactly why I would make this trade. I want Forseberg and 2 other top line players rather than just Lindros. I want Tyutin and 2 top 5 picks rather than just Crosby. If the Avs had selected Lindros first overall, they wouldn't have had some of the guys that were intrumental in winning their cups. But instead they made the trade and built their team around what they got. On the other hand, the Flyers made the trade and built around what they got and look where that has got them...no cups.

From a Philly point of view, they were going to be a good team either way, trade or no trade. I wouldn't say making the trade for Lindros was the reason they were solid for many years, but I would say it is the reason they haven't won a cup in that time period. They could have used one of the 1st rounders they gave up to get a goalie (their ongoing weakness for many years) and had Forsberg centering Leclair and Renberg...I think that team would have been even more succesful than they were with Lindros.

nyr7andcounting is offline  
Old
03-07-2005, 06:49 PM
  #22
NYFAN
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 361
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nyr7andcounting
If we got the first pick I would trade down. I would not trade with a team in the eastern conference and I would trade down no lower than 5th or 6th in this years draft. But you have to consider what would come back to the Rangers for Crosby. You are looking at a top 5 pick in 05, a 2nd rounder this year, probably a 1st rounder in 06(which makes it 2 top 10 picks in 2 years, if not 2 top 5 picks) and 2 top line prospects. You can form the core of a team through this trade alone.

The Rangers clearly lack depth as far as top line prospects go, so I would rather make a trade and get 3 or 4 top line prospects rather than make the first pick and have 1 top line guy.

Besides, one player doesn't win a championship. For those who say the trade wasn't the reason the Avs won their cups, it was because they had so many top level players....well that is exactly why I would make this trade. I want Forseberg and 2 other top line players rather than just Lindros. I want Tyutin and 2 top 5 picks rather than just Crosby. If the Avs had selected Lindros first overall, they wouldn't have had some of the guys that were intrumental in winning their cups. But instead they made the trade and built their team around what they got. On the other hand, the Flyers made the trade and built around what they got and look where that has got them...no cups.

From a Philly point of view, they were going to be a good team either way, trade or no trade. I wouldn't say making the trade for Lindros was the reason they were solid for many years, but I would say it is the reason they haven't won a cup in that time period. They could have used one of the 1st rounders they gave up to get a goalie (their ongoing weakness for many years) and had Forsberg centering Leclair and Renberg...I think that team would have been even more succesful than they were with Lindros.
You're missing the point, Crosby is a slam dunk NHL player, better than Lindros, not quite at the Gretzky or Lemieux level offensively! I don't care how many prospects you think you can get, either way this team is still in the basement, and will take several years to rebuild. I'd rather rebuild with him than without him!

NYFAN is offline  
Old
03-07-2005, 07:04 PM
  #23
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,012
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYFAN
You're missing the point, Crosby is a slam dunk NHL player, better than Lindros, not quite at the Gretzky or Lemieux level offensively! I don't care how many prospects you think you can get, either way this team is still in the basement, and will take several years to rebuild. I'd rather rebuild with him than without him!
So you if you were Quebec, you would not have made that trade? Or the Cowboys and Minnesotta? Come on. I cannot believe that there are actually people out there that would not have made the Quebec/Philly trade if they were Quebec.
Now, onto the other thing. Crosby is a slam dunk? How so? Wasn't Daigle a slam dunk? As was Brian Lawton. Heck, wasn't Lindros dubbed the "Next One"? At this point, Crosby is so good that he is getting overrated. NO ONE is Gretzky. The expectation for Crosby are so high, that I don't know if the kid is going to live up to them. The "not quite at the Gretzky or Lemieux level offensively" is a gross understatement. You are talking about 2 of the top 5 players ALL TIME. Give the kid a chance to play, before you so annoit him.
The road to stardom are littered with the Daigles and Lawtons of the world. All can't miss prospects. All talented beyond belief.

True Blue is offline  
Old
03-07-2005, 07:32 PM
  #24
AXN
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,451
vCash: 500
Crosby is not going to the Rangers. At least not in a full lottery. Maybe if they don't have the draft and the Rangers finnish in the buttom 3, they have a chance. That could happen since they have no one in their lineup signed.

AXN is offline  
Old
03-07-2005, 10:53 PM
  #25
NYFAN
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 361
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
So you if you were Quebec, you would not have made that trade? Or the Cowboys and Minnesotta? Come on. I cannot believe that there are actually people out there that would not have made the Quebec/Philly trade if they were Quebec.
Now, onto the other thing. Crosby is a slam dunk? How so? Wasn't Daigle a slam dunk? As was Brian Lawton. Heck, wasn't Lindros dubbed the "Next One"? At this point, Crosby is so good that he is getting overrated. NO ONE is Gretzky. The expectation for Crosby are so high, that I don't know if the kid is going to live up to them. The "not quite at the Gretzky or Lemieux level offensively" is a gross understatement. You are talking about 2 of the top 5 players ALL TIME. Give the kid a chance to play, before you so annoit him.
The road to stardom are littered with the Daigles and Lawtons of the world. All can't miss prospects. All talented beyond belief.
Not quite at Gretzky or lemieux level at that age my friend, but better than Lindros at that age offensively, more creative, and makes other players better than Eric did! Is that specific enough for you. None of those players were ever called the best he ever saw by Gretzky either. I would think he knows just a little bit more than you or I! As for the trade, I'd rather see the Rangers suck with Crosby than with a group of lesser prospects. Either way it will be a while before we are serious playoff contenders again, and there will be plenty of draft picks to pin our hopes on.

NYFAN is offline  
Closed Thread

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 09:02 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.