HFBoards

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

Barnaby and Barnaby63, you might want to

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-02-2004, 09:17 AM
  #26
klingsor
HFBoards Sponsor
 
klingsor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 14,084
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by barnaby63
I dont look at the deals as a whole? Lets see...

Jan Hlavac(waste), Pavel Brendl(bust) and Kim Johnsson(solid top-4 defenseman) for Eric Lindros.(our best player his first season here when he scored 78 points, 2nd best foward last season and again one of our top players this year)

I am sure you werent complaining about the trade when Lindros scored 78 points his first season. And for all the "troubles" he went through last season he was only a few points behind Nedved, everyone's favorite last season.

You would rather have Nedved? How do you expect to survive in the Eastern Conference with Petr as the top center?


Igor Ulanov(waste), Filip Novak(hasnt proven anything) and a 1st round pick(the most we gave up valuewise) for Pavel Bure and a 3rd round pick. A guy who along with Lindros almost pushed us into the playoffs with 12 goals in 12 games. He also started off good last season but his knees caught up to him.

Rem Murray(replaceable 3rd/4th liner), Tomas Kloucek(bust) and Marek Zidlicky(never wanted to sign with New York and didnt need his type of play anyway) for Mike Dunham. One of the best goalies last season and early this season that helped us win alot of games. But now since he is in a slump and Zidlicky has cooled off(like i said he would) we now have to look at the deal as a whole. Just keep backpedaling.


So we traded Kim Johnsson, Marek Zidlicky and a 1st round draft pick for Mike Dunham, Eric Lindros, Pavel Bure and a 3rd round pick.

Sorry, but i would do that deal everyday of the week.

I would just point out that Novak had an excellent rookie season with San Antonio in the AHL last year. He had a chance to make the Panthers this year but would have more likely been playing in San Antonio to further work on his game. He got injured in camp or preseason and has not returned as of last week.

It is a bit premature to call Brendl (a point a game in Lowell) and Kloucek busts, in my opinion.

Not gonna argue the trades, just questioning your dismissal for what we gave away.

I had no problem with the Bure trade. I was wrong. The only poster I remember questioning it was Laches (who mentioned Bure's knee problems). He took quite a pounding for it. Unfortunately, he was correct.


Last edited by klingsor: 01-02-2004 at 09:20 AM.
klingsor is offline  
Old
01-02-2004, 09:18 AM
  #27
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 29,779
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by barnaby63
I dont look at the deals as a whole? Lets see...

Jan Hlavac(waste), Pavel Brendl(bust) and Kim Johnsson(solid top-4 defenseman) for Eric Lindros.(our best player his first season here when he scored 78 points, 2nd best foward last season and again one of our top players this year)

I am sure you werent complaining about the trade when Lindros scored 78 points his first season. And for all the "troubles" he went through last season he was only a few points behind Nedved, everyone's favorite last season.

You would rather have Nedved? How do you expect to survive in the Eastern Conference with Petr as the top center?


Igor Ulanov(waste), Filip Novak(hasnt proven anything) and a 1st round pick(the most we gave up valuewise) for Pavel Bure and a 3rd round pick. A guy who along with Lindros almost pushed us into the playoffs with 12 goals in 12 games. He also started off good last season but his knees caught up to him.

Rem Murray(replaceable 3rd/4th liner), Tomas Kloucek(bust) and Marek Zidlicky(never wanted to sign with New York and didnt need his type of play anyway) for Mike Dunham. One of the best goalies last season and early this season that helped us win alot of games. But now since he is in a slump and Zidlicky has cooled off(like i said he would) we now have to look at the deal as a whole. Just keep backpedaling.


So we traded Kim Johnsson, Marek Zidlicky and a 1st round draft pick for Mike Dunham, Eric Lindros, Pavel Bure and a 3rd round pick.

Sorry, but i would do that deal everyday of the week.

You seem to want to give Sather a lot of credit for moves that almost paid off. Bure almost got us in the playoffs. Dunham almost got here in the playoffs. Lindros almost got us in the playoffs. As far a surviving the Eastern Conference with Nedved and the #1 center, I'm very comfortable in saying the results would not have been any worse. How are the Rangers surviving the Eastern Conference with Lindros?

Do you think the Rangers would have the same record with the players Sather traded? Hell the Rangers could have missed the playoffs with those players too.
And I think that you have forgotten what good goaltending is (I know I have). To say that Dunham has been the best Ranger goalie of recent years is not saying much. Has he been better than Blackburn, an injured Richter, Hebert and McLean? Yes. But what does that really say?

What remains first and foremost in my mind is this: whether or not this team is younger, faster, and bigger, whether or not the farm system is better stocked, the team has not made the playoffs under Glen Sather. WHICH IS WHY HE WAS BROUGHT HERE IN THE FIRST PLACE.

__________________
SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline  
Old
01-02-2004, 09:57 AM
  #28
barnaby63
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Long Island
Posts: 860
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by klingsor
I would just point out that Novak had an excellent rookie season with San Antonio in the AHL last year.
Mike Mottau was an all-star defenseman in the AHL too.

SBOB, i cant deny the fact that Sather hasnt done his job in getting us to the playoffs. But i think we are better off with the team as it is now then it was 3 years ago.

Davisian, who exactly was willing to trade a 1st line center when lindros was on the market?

barnaby63 is offline  
Old
01-02-2004, 10:03 AM
  #29
barnaby63
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Long Island
Posts: 860
vCash: 500
Kim Johnsson, Pavel Brendl(bust), Jan Hlavac, Rem Murray(replaced), Thomas Kloucek(bust), Marek Zidlicky(never wouldve signed), 1st rounder, Philip Novak(hasnt done jack), Igor Ulanov(waste)

For

Lindros, Bure, Dunham and a 3rd


Quote:
Originally Posted by Davisian
Do you seriously think that all those assets listed above could not have been managed better to either develop, or sent for others that could be a part of a young Ranger team right now??

Did any one of those moves lead to the playoffs??
I dont know. Do you have some kind of inside source that you knew who was available at the time of each trade where we couldve gotten better players for the players we traded?



Did they lead to the playoffs? No. But you have hindsight working for you. You cant sit there and say that when we aquired lindros, dunham and bure that you didnt think we had a better shot at the playoffs then before.

barnaby63 is offline  
Old
01-02-2004, 10:14 AM
  #30
klingsor
HFBoards Sponsor
 
klingsor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 14,084
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by barnaby63
Mike Mottau was an all-star defenseman in the AHL too.


Davisian, who exactly was willing to trade a 1st line center when lindros was on the market?
I'll just ignore the Mottau comparison.

Jason Allison was available. Doubt we could've got him for the same package we traded for Lindros as the Bruins preferred to trade him to the Western Conference. As one Bruin poster said: "We don't want no players named Jan and Kim on the B's"

Now I'm trying to be objective. Why don't you give it a shot?

klingsor is offline  
Old
01-02-2004, 10:16 AM
  #31
Laches
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 2,175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by barnaby63



I dont know. Do you have some kind of inside source that you knew who was available at the time of each trade where we couldve gotten better players for the players we traded?

Did they lead to the playoffs? No. But you have hindsight working for you. You cant sit there and say that when we aquired lindros, dunham and bure that you didnt think we had a better shot at the playoffs then before.
---First of all, you don't need an inside source to tell you that Sather overpaid for those players. When was the last time anyone gave up that much for a goalie who had never made the playoffs? Osgood won a Cup as a starter, and he couldn't fetch anything. Cechmanek went for a #2. Second, those trades were all challenged by many on this board, myself included, AT THE TIME THEY WERE MADE, so please dispense with the benefit of hindisght" nonsense.

Laches is offline  
Old
01-02-2004, 10:17 AM
  #32
Laches
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 2,175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by barnaby63
Davisian, who exactly was willing to trade a 1st line center when lindros was on the market?
---Yashin, Peca, Weight and Allison off the top of my head.

Laches is offline  
Old
01-02-2004, 10:22 AM
  #33
Davisian
Registered User
 
Davisian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Endicott
Posts: 6,074
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by barnaby63
Davisian, who exactly was willing to trade a 1st line center when lindros was on the market?
See, the point is, developing our own.. Instead of squandering a few players for 1 high risk one..


Quote:
Originally Posted by barnaby63
Kim Johnsson, Pavel Brendl(bust), Jan Hlavac, Rem Murray(replaced), Thomas Kloucek(bust), Marek Zidlicky(never wouldve signed), 1st rounder, Philip Novak(hasnt done jack), Igor Ulanov(waste)

For

Lindros, Bure, Dunham and a 3rd




I dont know. Do you have some kind of inside source that you knew who was available at the time of each trade where we couldve gotten better players for the players we traded?



Did they lead to the playoffs? No. But you have hindsight working for you. You cant sit there and say that when we aquired lindros, dunham and bure that you didnt think we had a better shot at the playoffs then before.
Are you just ignoring the point?? Nobody knew/knows who was available, but it isn't about the names, its about managing the assets.. If Sather didn't like the guys he sent, then there were other options available (there's ALWAYS othe roptions available). Instead, he sent them all in three and four for one deals..

And who's using hindsight?? At the time of these trades, your "busts" listed above, were fairly highly regarded prospects..

And I CAN say that when he acquired Lindros, Bure and Dunham I wasn't sure how much the team improved, but I was damn sure of one thing. Any chance of building a young core was being blown to smithereens..

Davisian is offline  
Old
01-02-2004, 10:37 AM
  #34
riz
Registered User
 
riz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Country: Finland
Posts: 1,477
vCash: 500
Okay, I might as well dip in here to lay my two cents about Marek again on the table.

Marek was visited in Finland by Rangers staff well before the 2001 Draft, as I quite clearly remember there being an article in the finnish paper about Rangers being interested in him and having talks with him. As always in the case of overage draft picks, the NHL team came to negotiate first to make sure the player is willing to come over. Marek was willing to come and the Rangers drafted him. After that, Rangers never made an offer good enough to bring him over (meanwhile shoveling ludicrous amounts to likes of Oliwa for example) so saying "never wanted to sign with New York and didnt need his type of play anyway" is a bit over the top. And if we "didnt need his type of play anyway", then how come we shipped Mike York to Alberta for the services of Tom Poti ? In the words of Glen Sather, 'because we needed a puck moving defenseman who can work the powerplay'.

I admit I didn't post any updates to the original thread after somewhile and yes, Marek tailed off from the point-per-game start he had. I've still followed all the boxscores and reports from the Predators' games to see how he is doing but posting updates in here would be just opening old wounds in these discussions. So has Marek gone sour now after the hot start ? Well, if playing 20 minutes a night means Nashville has lost confidence in him then yes. Last I heard he was improving his defensive game and adjusting to the North American rink while still doing his thing on the PP as usual. And as he did in Finland, he still continues to play bigger than his size, something that cannot be said from a few "defenseman" that hang around the MSG blueline.

So far this season Marek has racked up 8 goals and 15 assists for 23 points in 37 games. Out of those points, he has 6g 10a on powerplay which leaves us with 2g 5 assists on even strength (no pk points for him this season). He is still tied 5th in points for defensemen and considering the fact that Marek is averaging 19:41 a game while others in the Top-20 of D-men scoring are mostly going 25+ mins a game, he is doing okay. And last night, two assists (on PP) in a 3-2 win and the 2nd star of the game

I'm just happy he is doing fine and crafting a promising looking NHL career for himself. It's just funny to look around the NHL nowadays and see lots of players making decent careers out there after being traded away from the Rangers in "steals" and "great trades" that have gotten our team so far these past few years....Yes, the bottom line is that we haven't made smart trades to improve the _team_ but rather gone for the "big names" others were trying to offload. I can't really credit Sather for improving much these past years. We have more "names" and "stars" but where has it taken us so far ?

riz is offline  
Old
01-02-2004, 10:53 AM
  #35
barnaby63
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Long Island
Posts: 860
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Laches
---Yashin, Peca, Weight and Allison off the top of my head.
And how much would they have cost the rangers? a helluva lot more than lindros. So if you want to use this mis-management of value excuse then why would you pony up more in one deal for other players?

barnaby63 is offline  
Old
01-02-2004, 11:03 AM
  #36
barnaby63
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Long Island
Posts: 860
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Davisian
See, the point is, developing our own.. Instead of squandering a few players for 1 high risk one..
ok, i understand that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Davisian
Are you just ignoring the point?? Nobody knew/knows who was available, but it isn't about the names, its about managing the assets.. If Sather didn't like the guys he sent, then there were other options available (there's ALWAYS othe roptions available). Instead, he sent them all in three and four for one deals..
Exactly. No one knew who was available so how can you say other options were available? Especially the ones Laches listed which wouldve cost us alot more than what you are complaining about.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Davisian
And who's using hindsight?? At the time of these trades, your "busts" listed above, were fairly highly regarded prospects..
and maybe sather and co. knew they wouldnt do any good and traded them while they had "value" according to you.

Other teams arent stupid, maybe Philly while scouting Brendl in the minors didnt like something about him which made him a risk prospect on their part?

Same with Kloucek. At the time he was traded he was already a injury-prone defenseman who plays physical. Nashville probably thought it was a risk on there part. Same with Zidlicky, they didnt know how he would play in the NHL but they had to take the risk. We didnt.

ITs not like sather traded some super kids with no problems with them, other teams knew what was wrong with them so it was risky of them too which decreases there value.

My point is, if Philly deemed Brendl a risk, they needed more for the deal to get done. With the Rangers needing a number 1 center they gave up a little more to get it done.

How about this, at the time of each trade give me a list of what you think each player we traded value was. Maybe i can get a better view of what you are thinking about each player.

barnaby63 is offline  
Old
01-02-2004, 11:38 AM
  #37
Davisian
Registered User
 
Davisian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Endicott
Posts: 6,074
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by barnaby63
How about this, at the time of each trade give me a list of what you think each player we traded value was. Maybe i can get a better view of what you are thinking about each player.

****bangs head against desk****

Sigh..

Kim Johnsson- 3rd to 5th D-man, second PP option.. Very good wheels, not very physical..

Pavel Brendl- Hit or miss prospect, gifted goal scorer, more gifted hot dog eater..

Jan Hlavac- Good scoring touch, good chemistry with other czech's, not physical enough.

Rem Murray- Good PK'er and team player a good swing man to have for depth

Thomas Kloucek- Physical monster, once his knee fully heal, should be a 4th defenseman that plays on the top pair...

Marek Zidlicky- Didn't see him, liked the reports from riz and others.

1st rounder- Need them, need more of them

Philip Novak- Looked great in first camp, developing 2nd-3rd defenseman with a great upside..

Igor Ulanov- expletive, deleted, expletive


This is what I thought of these guys right before they were traded.. I never thought any of them were untouchable, I never thought any one or two would be big losses.. But Philly's options were limited in Lindros, and Florida's were with Bure.. They were not "needs" at the time, when what was truly needed was younger legs, and a clear direction for the future..

Especially considering the comments made by Sather about the Rangers way of doing business before he took the job, and immediately after.. He lied, plain and simple..

Young assets can be moved for other young assets, if he didn;t like some of these guys, he could have found similiar young "risks" that were more in his mold.. Instead, he continued to operate the rangers the same way Neil Smith was, and it's continued the losing streak..

Davisian is offline  
Old
01-02-2004, 11:49 AM
  #38
Laches
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 2,175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by barnaby63
Exactly. No one knew who was available so how can you say other options were available? Especially the ones Laches listed which wouldve cost us alot more than what you are complaining about.
---Hogwash. You're going to tell me that the Lindros deal was the ONLY one available to Sather? That he had literally no other options? Please. You want evidence that other players were available, look at the ones that were dealt around the same time. I think it's safe to say that if a guy was traded, he was available, don't you? The Blues got Weight and another player from Edmonton for Hecht, Reasoner and Horacek. That's a lot less than what Sather gave up for Lindros.

Laches is offline  
Old
01-02-2004, 12:11 PM
  #39
Av-merican
@Av_merican
 
Av-merican's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: The Frozen Wasteland
Country: Scotland
Posts: 10,723
vCash: 500
Bottom line, this is the oldest team in the NHL and is also one of the slowest teams in the NHL. All those things and they're not a particularly gritty team, big team, or physical team. Yet they lead the NHL in PIMs, not because they're tough or like to fight, because they play unorganized, undisciplined hockey. Too many of the same types of players, not enough workhorses, and a coach/GM who has no clue about accountability.

Av-merican is offline  
Old
01-02-2004, 12:19 PM
  #40
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 29,779
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Av-merican
Bottom line, this is the oldest team in the NHL and is also one of the slowest teams in the NHL. All those things and they're not a particularly gritty team, big team, or physical team. Yet they lead the NHL in PIMs, not because they're tough or like to fight, because they play unorganized, undisciplined hockey. Too many of the same types of players, not enough workhorses, and a coach/GM who has no clue about accountability.
That's not entirely true.

I don't think they are the oldest team in the NHL.

Also their PIM are high because they have been hit with an amazingly large number of match penalties which count towards PIM but not in the ammount of time short handed.

What did surprise me was the number in the Post today. The Rangers average 19.9 PIM per game. That's a hole period short handed. Again, the numbers are not completely telling but they are high enough to be alarming.

SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline  
Old
01-02-2004, 12:22 PM
  #41
barnaby63
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Long Island
Posts: 860
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Laches
---Hogwash. You're going to tell me that the Lindros deal was the ONLY one available to Sather? That he had literally no other options? Please. You want evidence that other players were available, look at the ones that were dealt around the same time. I think it's safe to say that if a guy was traded, he was available, don't you? The Blues got Weight and another player from Edmonton for Hecht, Reasoner and Horacek. That's a lot less than what Sather gave up for Lindros.
Thats all he was traded for? Man, i thought the Blues gave up more.

What player on the Rangers and in Hartford compare to Reasoner, Hect and Horacek?

Davisian, i understood your point about mis-management and i can see where you are coming from, but from what i heard and what i think i dont think the deals are really that horrible.

Guess we have to agree to disagree. No hard feelings?

barnaby63 is offline  
Old
01-02-2004, 12:36 PM
  #42
Laches
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 2,175
vCash: 500
In all of the discussions about former Rangers like Zidlicky that never got a chance hear, I don't recall seeing any mention of Nils Ekman, 10 G, 8 A, +4 with San Jose. Not Hart Trophy material by any means, but I think I'd rather see him out there than Hlavac.

Laches is offline  
Old
01-02-2004, 12:44 PM
  #43
barnaby63
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Long Island
Posts: 860
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Laches
In all of the discussions about former Rangers like Zidlicky that never got a chance hear, I don't recall seeing any mention of Nils Ekman, 10 G, 8 A, +4 with San Jose. Not Hart Trophy material by any means, but I think I'd rather see him out there than Hlavac.
Ekman said if he wasnt in the top 6 this season he wanted to be traded. In pre-season the Hlavac-Nedved-Kovalev line was pretty good so we traded Nils for a 23? year old prospect. I think both teams did pretty good in the deal.

barnaby63 is offline  
Old
01-02-2004, 12:48 PM
  #44
Potter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Bridgewater NJ
Posts: 331
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Potter
Quote:
Originally Posted by barnaby63
Mike Mottau was an all-star defenseman in the AHL too.

SBOB, i cant deny the fact that Sather hasnt done his job in getting us to the playoffs. But i think we are better off with the team as it is now then it was 3 years ago.

Davisian, who exactly was willing to trade a 1st line center when lindros was on the market?

barnaby63 I'm just curious... what is the ultimate goal of a hockey team? (hint: to win the stanely cup) Now, what must happen first to get the Cup? (hint: make the playoffs) As of now, Sather has had ample time and has not completed any of the essential objectives of a GM, especially one with an unlimited budget. In the case of the Rangers, we should judge the Rangers soley on WINNING, which they have not done. barnaby63, my point is just pretty much what I say to all Sather supporters, he has not gotten this team to the playoffs and thats all I look at.

Potter is offline  
Old
01-02-2004, 01:16 PM
  #45
barnaby63
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Long Island
Posts: 860
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Potter
barnaby63 I'm just curious... what is the ultimate goal of a hockey team? (hint: to win the stanely cup) Now, what must happen first to get the Cup? (hint: make the playoffs) As of now, Sather has had ample time and has not completed any of the essential objectives of a GM, especially one with an unlimited budget. In the case of the Rangers, we should judge the Rangers soley on WINNING, which they have not done. barnaby63, my point is just pretty much what I say to all Sather supporters, he has not gotten this team to the playoffs and thats all I look at.
Ugh. As i have already said, if you base your opinion on Sather entirely on making the playoffs, then yes he has failed.

But i maintain, this team is better right now then it was 3 years ago. Of course not on the record, but the talent is better than it was then, and the farm is improved from 3 years ago. Hardly a juggernat like Ottawa's system, but its not a bad start.

barnaby63 is offline  
Old
01-02-2004, 03:00 PM
  #46
Brooklyn Ranger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn, of course
Posts: 7,682
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by barnaby63
Ekman said if he wasnt in the top 6 this season he wanted to be traded. In pre-season the Hlavac-Nedved-Kovalev line was pretty good so we traded Nils for a 23? year old prospect. I think both teams did pretty good in the deal.
Tell me, where did you see that Ekman demanded to be in the top 6 or be traded? The reason why I ask is because back in August when the trade between the Rangers and SJ took place you said:

"PEOPLE! ekman has said that if he didnt make the rangers this season that he would go back to sweden or whatever country he came from. we got a 22 year old leftwing that can play defense,hustle and can chip in some offense for someone that isnt going to be in our plans after this season! and the kid still has time to develop! so stop your *****ing already! jeez" (post dated 8/13).

And just so you know (in case you've missed previous posts where I've mentioned it) I lived Sweden (and hence keep track of most Swedish players in the NHL, especially the ones in the Ranger organization) and still regularly read the hockey news from Swedish sources and NEVER saw anyone, much less Ekman, demand that he be in the top 6 anywhere in the NHL. Yes, he absolutely said that he didn't want to stay with the Rangers unless he was given a legitimate chance to win a roster spot in the NHL, but given the fact that he was one of the leading scorers for Hartford, played LW and was never called up last season-in spite of the injuries and the lack of natural LWers on the Rangers--it was extremely clear where Ekman stood with Sather.

So please, enlighten us with your inside knowledge of what exactly Ekman demanded. I'm not asking you to look it up and show me (although that would be nice)--I know you just don't have the time-- just an idea of where you got this little tidbit on Ekman.

And I wonder when we'll see Wiseman, especially since MSG has made no move to broadcast any Wolfpack games.

Edit: Also, you must be aware that Hlavac was not signed until late August (just a few days before Labor Day). Ekman was traded before that so there was no way to know how wonderful Nedved/Hlavac/Kovalev looked playing together.

I know, I know, details are so boring.


Last edited by Brooklyn Ranger: 01-02-2004 at 03:18 PM.
Brooklyn Ranger is offline  
Old
01-02-2004, 03:09 PM
  #47
Brooklyn Ranger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn, of course
Posts: 7,682
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by barnaby63
Ugh. As i have already said, if you base your opinion on Sather entirely on making the playoffs, then yes he has failed.

But i maintain, this team is better right now then it was 3 years ago. Of course not on the record, but the talent is better than it was then, and the farm is improved from 3 years ago. Hardly a juggernat like Ottawa's system, but its not a bad start.
The problem here is that Sather has made making the playoffs the cornerstone of his tenure here. Those are his words and his goal. How else are we supposed to judge him?

Rebuilding the farm system is nice, but Sather's main goal is to make the playoffs and win the Stanley Cup. For 3 years he's failed. Right now, we are not a playoff team and there are absolutely no guarantees that we will become one by the end of the season. When are we allowed to judge Sather's tenure? Only after he's retired and left NY?

Brooklyn Ranger is offline  
Old
01-02-2004, 03:42 PM
  #48
Shadowtron
Registered User
 
Shadowtron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,509
vCash: 500
Does any of this really matter? Who cares what he's doing over there. The trades done. Maybe the Barnabys are guilty of overstating, but who cares? It's not something new to this board...or to the entire site for that matter. It happens. Calling them out in a post is just asking for trouble, I think, and as BLACKBURN said, lacks purpose.

Shadowtron is offline  
Old
01-02-2004, 03:57 PM
  #49
barnaby63
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Long Island
Posts: 860
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadowtron
Does any of this really matter? Who cares what he's doing over there. The trades done. Maybe the Barnabys are guilty of overstating, but who cares? It's not something new to this board...or to the entire site for that matter. It happens. Calling them out in a post is just asking for trouble, I think, and as BLACKBURN said, lacks purpose.
Yes. Anyone with half a brain would realize this thread was pointless utill Laches and Davisian started to talk with legit points.

Brooklyn, we are still waiting for you to answer RangerDieHards question. Or are you avoiding it?

As for Ekman, part of it was what you stated. That he wanted a guaranteed chance at making the top 6. But i did read in one of the locals that Ekman said that if he didnt make the top 6 that he wanted to be traded(i mean i hope you would realize how easy it is for Ekman to think that with you so casually pointing out how Sather had something out for him so he knew he wouldnt be on the team so he demaded a trade), now knowing that Sather would later sign Hlavac, Sather didnt feel like he needed a demanding player like that so he got good value for him.

barnaby63 is offline  
Old
01-02-2004, 03:59 PM
  #50
Davisian
Registered User
 
Davisian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Endicott
Posts: 6,074
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by barnaby63
No hard feelings?
None at all..

Towards you..

Sather on the other hand.......

Davisian 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 06:36 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.