HFBoards

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

POTI: To Trade now or to Trade later

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-07-2005, 09:02 AM
  #1
HockeyBasedNYC
Registered User
 
HockeyBasedNYC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Here
Country: United States
Posts: 12,853
vCash: 500
POTI: To Trade now or to Trade later

With the signing of Poti for 2.35 Mil for one year, and the recent aquisition of another d-man in Rozsival, does this spell the imminent departure of Tom "Purseboy" Poti?

Some would hope that is the case immediately, but theres also speculation that he might be moved later on in the season when his deadline trade value rises.

Here's Why:

With the new rules "opening up" the game, the Rangers could use a good passing defensman and powerplay quarterback. Theres not much offensive upside, if any -on the backlines for Rangers this year - so is it logical to hold onto him to fill that void until the latter part of the season?

Of course if there was a decent trade offer for him most would do it this very second, but with teams trying to recover from the financial hit taken from the lockout, the deeper the playoff run, the deeper the pockets become of that team. Poti aside, I believe many clubs, both locked into OR seemingly out of the playoff race will become more adept to taking chances and trading players to get into the playoffs or extend their run in them, therefore creating more of a buyers market come seasons end. The fact that the trading deadline has been moved up, also creates more of this buyers buzz because more teams will be "on the bubble". With that said, almost any decent players' value rises.


Last edited by HockeyBasedNYC: 09-07-2005 at 09:14 AM.
HockeyBasedNYC is offline  
Old
09-07-2005, 09:09 AM
  #2
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,422
vCash: 500
the pros to moving him now is that the rangers might be able to get package him as part of a deal to get a young forward or something to fill one of their needs...and it opens up space on the blueline

the cons are that it leaves the rangers with a legit PP quarterback and offensive defenseman, and like you said...it's possible he could be worth more later.

either way is fine with me, i don't mind poti but i think it's possible he could be more valuable to this team as trade bait

Levitate is offline  
Old
09-07-2005, 09:14 AM
  #3
Kodiak
Registered User
 
Kodiak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Ranger fan in Philly
Posts: 2,185
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Kodiak Send a message via AIM to Kodiak Send a message via Yahoo to Kodiak
IMO, all this "Poti is on the way out" talk is really just wishful thinking from the fans. I definitely can't see Sather moving Poti before the season, and I doubt he's moved during the season unless Sather decides not to re-sign him.

Kodiak is offline  
Old
09-07-2005, 09:19 AM
  #4
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 20,942
vCash: 500
Poti may be used...

as a bargaining chip, which is partly why Sather built-up the defense, and retained Kaspar. Of course, with the departure of Rachunek, at least one defenseman would've been added, so net, the team really only added one and I'd think that Sather was going to add one if Rachunek was here.

If Poti is used correctly, I don't think we'll be too upset (especially if he's the guy that played the first half of the 2002-2003 season in which he was near tops in scoring, and actually physical). He should not be used against top lines - hopefully Renney will realize this. He should be paired with someone defensively competent - which will be hard to do on this Rangers team. He should be out there on the power play, and he should be out there when Jagr's on the ice. It's a pretty simple formula, and I think that if it's followed, we won't complain too much about Poti.

Fletch is offline  
Old
09-07-2005, 09:25 AM
  #5
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 29,773
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kodiak
IMO, all this "Poti is on the way out" talk is really just wishful thinking from the fans. I definitely can't see Sather moving Poti before the season, and I doubt he's moved during the season unless Sather decides not to re-sign him.
Completely agree.

Furthermore, I don't think Sather is looking to, or even wants to, trade Poti.

SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline  
Old
09-07-2005, 09:45 AM
  #6
HockeyBasedNYC
Registered User
 
HockeyBasedNYC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Here
Country: United States
Posts: 12,853
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kodiak
IMO, all this "Poti is on the way out" talk is really just wishful thinking from the fans. I definitely can't see Sather moving Poti before the season, and I doubt he's moved during the season unless Sather decides not to re-sign him.
I cant disagree with that, I just felt like commenting on the overwhemling amount of posts ive read by most of the fans here that think he is good as gone. The one year signing does indicate that Sather is not totally dedicated to him, but i too cant see anything happening before the season concerning poti.

HockeyBasedNYC is offline  
Old
09-07-2005, 09:46 AM
  #7
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,006
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway
Completely agree.

Furthermore, I don't think Sather is looking to, or even wants to, trade Poti.
Doctor, I concur with your prognosisn. All this "when should the Rangers trade Poti" talk is nothing but hot air. Sather loves Poti. He is his type of player, all-offense and no defense. Sather has got it in his mind that the NHL will become a North American version of the SEL or the Finnish league. He is in for a rude awakening when he finds that coaches like Lemaire and Hitch simply do not allow their defensemen to go past the blueline. Sather sees the new rules as a return to the pond-hockey he loves so much. Renney said that the Rangers will be back to playing an "attacking style". Poti goes nowhere.

True Blue is offline  
Old
09-07-2005, 10:30 AM
  #8
JR#9*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,733
vCash: 500
I actually think Poti will be near the top of the NHL in Dman scoring this year and I think he'll be a real nice trading chip to have come the deadline when teams are looking to add top 4 dmen who can jumpstart the offense from the blueline.

Defenseman will be at a premium come the deadline because almost every teams top 6 is very thin with the new cap.

JR#9* is offline  
Old
09-07-2005, 10:40 AM
  #9
BringBackNeilSmith
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Warren County, NJ
Posts: 244
vCash: 500
Posted this on the latest Roszival thread before I saw this one:

"Maybe it's just me, but I'd wait a couple months before moving Poti, or at least going out of my way to do so. I'd kind of like to get a handle on just how the rules changes are going to play out first... we could find ourselves in an environment where Poti's passing skills are of sufficient additional importance that they finally outweigh his defensive liabilities just a little. I'm not a big fan of his, and I'd still take York back in a heartbeat, but looking elsewhere on the roster for someone who we know can QB the 1st team on the power play I come up empty. With the team we have right now, Poti would almost have to be moved for another offensive defenseman, and they mostly share the same upsides and downsides... Bourques and Leetches don't grow on trees and you sure don't get them in a trade for Tom Poti."

Along similar lines, I don't think you move Poti to open up space for Lampman. Pock might have the skills to assume this role eventually, but I'm not clear he's ready to do that right now, if ever. He might've seemed a little more expendable if Rachunek had remained, but even that's a bit of a stretch. My own view for now is, let Pock light 'em up in Hartford, if he can, see how play unfolds thru Thanksgiving or so, and reevaluate.

Among the many good comments above, I do agree this guy is of special interest to Sather and that's precisely why he traded away the skill and grit package that York represented in order to get him. These jokers talk about teaching guys to be "real Rangers" and when they finally do grow one they dump him for a guy who plays only half the ice surface and with half an effort. Hope we've seen the end of the kind of mistake that Poti represents, but I'm prepared to be disappointed.

BringBackNeilSmith is offline  
Old
09-07-2005, 11:21 AM
  #10
barrel_master
Amber Heard
 
barrel_master's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,922
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
Doctor, I concur with your prognosisn. All this "when should the Rangers trade Poti" talk is nothing but hot air. Sather loves Poti. He is his type of player, all-offense and no defense. Sather has got it in his mind that the NHL will become a North American version of the SEL or the Finnish league. He is in for a rude awakening when he finds that coaches like Lemaire and Hitch simply do not allow their defensemen to go past the blueline. Sather sees the new rules as a return to the pond-hockey he loves so much. Renney said that the Rangers will be back to playing an "attacking style". Poti goes nowhere.
Ha ha man... you really hate sather don't you? To characterize sather as a guy that loves players that play 'all-offense and no defence' is misleading. Fair enough, Sather does seem to like flashy superstar players with poor defence. However his past aquisitions of Holik, Malik and Staal suggest that he does realize that defence is an important faucet of the game.

barrel_master is offline  
Old
09-07-2005, 11:25 AM
  #11
HockeyBasedNYC
Registered User
 
HockeyBasedNYC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Here
Country: United States
Posts: 12,853
vCash: 500
Mike York was the perfect "Ranger Grit" player that id love to build a team personality around. Im still shaking my head at the fact that they traded him. Now we have to deal with him on the Island and to tell you the truth the Islanders have way more of that "grit" the rangers staff talks about. That had to be one of the dumbest trades ever, especially when you look at the rangers roster now and the "rebuilding" phase they are in.

HockeyBasedNYC is offline  
Old
09-07-2005, 11:28 AM
  #12
HockeyBasedNYC
Registered User
 
HockeyBasedNYC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Here
Country: United States
Posts: 12,853
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by barrel_master
Ha ha man... you really hate sather don't you? To characterize sather as a guy that loves players that play 'all-offense and no defence' is misleading. Fair enough, Sather does seem to like flashy superstar players with poor defence. However his past aquisitions of Holik, Malik and Staal suggest that he does realize that defence is an important faucet of the game.
Yeah, It only took about 10 years to have his fellow assistants convince him of that. And Holik didnt fit with the team and he was overpaid severely.

HockeyBasedNYC is offline  
Old
09-07-2005, 12:21 PM
  #13
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,006
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by barrel_master
Ha ha man... you really hate sather don't you? To characterize sather as a guy that loves players that play 'all-offense and no defence' is misleading. Fair enough, Sather does seem to like flashy superstar players with poor defence. However his past aquisitions of Holik, Malik and Staal suggest that he does realize that defence is an important faucet of the game.
What does hating Sather have to do with anything? Is that the best argument that you can think of to rebut me?
Let's try this. Do you recall Sather's comments that he does not care if he wins every game 10-8, as long as his team scores the 10? Do you recall his open disdain of defensive systems? How about the style that the Rangers played under his tenure? What within that style said "defense" to you? On the subject of Malik, look to the other threads. Staal is not going to be playing for the big club for at least another year or two. And while, yes, Sather did acquire Holik, he then refused to play him in a role that he has been successful in. Sather did not play Holik as the best checking center in the league, he played him as either the top or 2nd line center.

True Blue is offline  
Old
09-07-2005, 12:30 PM
  #14
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 20,942
vCash: 500
Barrel...

I don't disagree with the concept you're bringing forward, but I'm not sure Malik is evidence that Sather's moving towards better defensive players. Also, while Holik was a defensive forward, more often than not he was not used as that kind of guy, so why the acquisition may've been proper, the use was not.

Hockey - I don't think anybody would build a team around York. He's a very useful cog in any team you build, but you don't build around him. It's nice that he works hard, but to get 15 goals a season, he has to work twice as hard as the next guy, and in the end, it's still only the 15 goals you get. He's a great all-around package that fits nicely anywhere, but his most effective role, over the long haul, is as a supporter.

Fletch is offline  
Old
09-07-2005, 12:39 PM
  #15
BringBackNeilSmith
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Warren County, NJ
Posts: 244
vCash: 500
Well, the phrase he used was "build a team personality around"... and I concur. It is kind of challenging to do that with a guy who is not a star player, but you do it in other ways. You show the rest of the team what his value is considered to be. You give him ice time. You give him responsibility. You reward other players for approaching the game the way he does. And then you get more players with his makeup and use them to grow still more guys with those attributes. This is not that different a player in a lot of respects than Adam Graves was the first few years... not in terms of the physicality element, no, but a lot of the same kind of character displayed on ice and off. If you're going to move toward a given approach in a way that has any credibility, you don't begin by moving the people who best represent that approach.

With a smarter management team in place Mike York could certainly have helped show this bunch the way for years to come.

BringBackNeilSmith is offline  
Old
09-07-2005, 12:49 PM
  #16
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 29,773
vCash: 500
Awards:
The more things change, the more they stay the same.

http://www.newyorkrangers.com/fanzon...ger=Sather2000

From 9/2000

Glen Sather: I don't necessarily believe defense wins championships. I think offense wins championships.

Glen Sather: I'm absolutely uninterested in playing the "dreaded trap." The "trap" is a dirty word to me.

Glen Sather: I am not going to predict who they are going to be this early, but we would like to see the addition of three of four younger guys on the team.

Glen Sather: Our strategy is to try to win the Stanley Cup this year and rebuild at the same time. But, I'm not going to dismantle the team and do it entirely with young guys. I think that you need a number of older mature veterans, which we have, and we are going to try to incorporate some younger guys into the lineup as we go along.

http://www.newyorkrangers.com/fanzon...?Ranger=sather

From: April 27, 2001

GS: I think that a good defense starts with a good offense. I'd rather have the puck in the other team's end with a strong goaltender in back and good defensemen to move the puck.

GS: Traditionally, free agency hasn't worked out in many places. But a lot of that has to do with the kind of players who have been available in the past. If you look at the free agent market of this year, there are many fine, talented and aggressive players available. We'll have to see what happens.


http://www.newyorkrangers.com/fanzon...ger=sather2002

From 2002

GS: "I don't feel we have enough puck-moving defensemen. That's why we got Tom Poti. He's a great addition for us. Not only can he move the puck, but he can skate and poke check as well as anyone in the game."

http://www.newyorkrangers.com/fanzone/qa.asp

From 8/2005

GS: Our strategy and plan is for the long term. We are not looking for any quick fixes. Our goal is to develop a hard working and entertaining team from within. While our goal is always to be as successful as we can and make the playoffs, we will not sacrifice the commitment we have made to the long term for any short-term gains. All of our player transactions must fit into our long-term strategy.

SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline  
Old
09-07-2005, 12:56 PM
  #17
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 10,063
vCash: 500
I'm going to catch a lot of flak for this, but I think a large part of the regard for York on this board is based on the fact that we traded him more than anything else. (Not to mention who we traded him for.) Guys who try really, really hard are nice to have, but are no more than a "cog" (as someone else put it) on a winning team.

If he was still here, I think many of us would be complaining about how such an undersized forward with limited offensive upside was getting way too much ice time. In the grand scheme of things, I think a #1 PP QB is worth more than a sub-par 2nd line center/above average 3rd line center, much as we all are frustrated with poke-check Poti in his own zone. Hopefully this will be borne out when Sather trades him (which I still maintain is his plan, otherwise he would have given him multiple years on the contract).

BrooklynRangersFan is offline  
Old
09-07-2005, 12:56 PM
  #18
eco's bones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Elmira NY
Country: United States
Posts: 12,228
vCash: 500
I don't think Sather trades Poti until he finds out how poti swims in the new NHL.
If I had my personal druthers we'd team him up with some no nonsense pysical stay at home defenseman. Unfortunately nobody really fits the bill. Would I like to see him traded based on his past? Absolutely.
He is my least favorite player on the team by at least two miles. But unless someone were to come along now with a great package--doubtful--he's going to be here. And no we shouldn't just give him away either.

eco's bones is offline  
Old
09-07-2005, 01:00 PM
  #19
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 10,063
vCash: 500
On the plus side, I see

Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway
From 9/2000

Glen Sather: Our strategy is to try to win the Stanley Cup this year and rebuild at the same time. But, I'm not going to dismantle the team and do it entirely with young guys. I think that you need a number of older mature veterans, which we have, and we are going to try to incorporate some younger guys into the lineup as we go along.
as very different from

Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway
From 8/2005

GS: Our strategy and plan is for the long term. We are not looking for any quick fixes. Our goal is to develop a hard working and entertaining team from within. While our goal is always to be as successful as we can and make the playoffs, we will not sacrifice the commitment we have made to the long term for any short-term gains. All of our player transactions must fit into our long-term strategy.
The emphasis has definitely shifted.

Now let's see if the actions fit the words.

BrooklynRangersFan is offline  
Old
09-07-2005, 01:05 PM
  #20
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 29,773
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynRangerFan
I'm going to catch a lot of flak for this, but I think a large part of the regard for York on this board is based on the fact that we traded him more than anything else. (Not to mention who we traded him for.) Guys who try really, really hard are nice to have, but are no more than a "cog" (as someone else put it) on a winning team.

If he was still here, I think many of us would be complaining about how such an undersized forward with limited offensive upside was getting way too much ice time. In the grand scheme of things, I think a #1 PP QB is worth more than a sub-par 2nd line center/above average 3rd line center, much as we all are frustrated with poke-check Poti in his own zone. Hopefully this will be borne out when Sather trades him (which I still maintain is his plan, otherwise he would have given him multiple years on the contract).

Yes and no.

You're right that a lot of peoples ill-will towards Poti is partly based on the fact that York was traded for him. And that's not fair.

But the criticism of his play is quite fair. He is a liability in his own zone. Avoids contact (can you imagine a defenseman who would rather be hit than do the hitting?). He also is not this offensive wizard that he's been made out to be. In fact, last season (03-04) was more of the norm than the 02-03 season was. He's averaged about 30 points a season. That is not elite offesive defenseman numbers. And #1 PP QBs register more than 14 assists in a season.

SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline  
Old
09-07-2005, 01:05 PM
  #21
BwayBshirt
Registered User
 
BwayBshirt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: My NY State of Mind
Country: United States
Posts: 3,370
vCash: 500
i don't recall any of the rangers' crew in recent memory saying they were going to be a more defensive squad. what i do recall is them saying (particularly a direct quote from renney shortly after he was hired IIRC) is that they were going to look for players who could play at both ends of the ice--no more one-dimensional players (i.e. offense only)--for the long term.

also, it's not a stretch to say that you can win with offense in the nhl. you just better have a good defensive philosophy/system to compliment that. needless to say that's something we've been lacking lately.

BwayBshirt is offline  
Old
09-07-2005, 01:06 PM
  #22
HockeyBasedNYC
Registered User
 
HockeyBasedNYC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Here
Country: United States
Posts: 12,853
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch
Hockey - I don't think anybody would build a team around York. He's a very useful cog in any team you build, but you don't build around him. It's nice that he works hard, but to get 15 goals a season, he has to work twice as hard as the next guy, and in the end, it's still only the 15 goals you get. He's a great all-around package that fits nicely anywhere, but his most effective role, over the long haul, is as a supporter.
I agree. I said his hockey grit is a great PERSONALITY to build around... not just him as a player. You right on with your comment though.

HockeyBasedNYC is offline  
Old
09-07-2005, 01:06 PM
  #23
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 29,773
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynRangerFan
Now let's see if the actions fit the words.
Why would it start now? We're still hearing the same thing.

SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline  
Old
09-07-2005, 01:24 PM
  #24
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 10,063
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway
Yes and no.

You're right that a lot of peoples ill-will towards Poti is partly based on the fact that York was traded for him. And that's not fair.

But the criticism of his play is quite fair. He is a liability in his own zone. Avoids contact (can you imagine a defenseman who would rather be hit than do the hitting?). He also is not this offensive wizard that he's been made out to be. In fact, last season (03-04) was more of the norm than the 02-03 season was. He's averaged about 30 points a season. That is not elite offesive defenseman numbers. And #1 PP QBs register more than 14 assists in a season.
Actually, my comments were more about folks on the board OVER-rating York rather than people UNDER-rating Poti.

Towards your point however, I view '03-'04 as a total loss of a season - for many of the Rangers - given the turmoil caused by inept coaching, coaching changes, injuires, the trading deadline purge, and of course the impending labor dispute. Furthermore, I think that his drop in assists had a lot more to do with poor finishing by the forwards than his own mistakes - after all, he was a double-digit goal scorer for the 3rd year out of 4.

All of which is a long way of saying, I hold out hope that we're going to see a guy more like Poti '02-'03 this year... so that we can trade him, of course.

But then I've had a decidedly optimistic view towards the approach this season (which is a first in about five years, believe me) since I joined the board.

BrooklynRangersFan is offline  
Old
09-07-2005, 01:27 PM
  #25
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 10,063
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway
Why would it start now? We're still hearing the same thing.
I disagree - look at the highlights I took from Glen's '00 comments vs. his '05 comments, above.

BrooklynRangersFan 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 09:04 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.