HFBoards

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

Dead Men Skating

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-16-2004, 07:00 AM
  #1
KING
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,776
vCash: 500
Dead Men Skating

http://nypost.com/sports/rangers/17217.htm

KING is offline  
Old
03-16-2004, 08:17 AM
  #2
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 29,779
vCash: 500
Awards:
"I could tell say that my groin is bothering me, and that's true, but I can't use that as an excuse," Jagr told The Post. "It hurts, but I'm not injured to where I can't play, or can't play better. I should play better."

Why is this guy still playing right now? I understand there is a pride factor but shut him down.

__________________
SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline  
Old
03-16-2004, 08:46 AM
  #3
Melrose_Jr.
Registered User
 
Melrose_Jr.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Providence, RI
Country: United States
Posts: 10,692
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway
Why is this guy still playing right now? I understand there is a pride factor but shut him down.
The big question is, what is this guy doing here? Jagr's groin has a problem since he was in Pittsburgh. He missed signifigant stretches of time with it throughout his career in Washington. What GM in his right mind allows himself to be saddled with a problem like this? Lindros wasn't enough? Bure wasn't enough?

Melrose_Jr. is offline  
Old
03-16-2004, 11:32 AM
  #4
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,006
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melrose_Jr.
What GM in his right mind allows himself to be saddled with a problem like this? Lindros wasn't enough? Bure wasn't enough?
Obviously not. Given all the past often-injured players that suddenly got well as Rangers, one can understand the track-record from whence the Jagr trade was born. Nothing like an over-paid offensive player making a boatload of money on a team that is trying to rebuild itself and rehabilitate it's image.

True Blue is offline  
Old
03-16-2004, 11:42 AM
  #5
charliemurphy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Concrete Jungle, NYC
Posts: 475
vCash: 500
I agree in shutting him down. But Jagr and his hefty contract aren't going anywhere, along with Holik and Kasparaitis. He's been playing very well since arriving.
Maybe just maybe out of all of the bad moves ala Lindros, Bure, Kovalev, etc. that Sather had made, Jagr might just be a plus.

charliemurphy is offline  
Old
03-16-2004, 08:35 PM
  #6
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Tromelin
Posts: 9,481
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
Obviously not. Given all the past often-injured players that suddenly got well as Rangers, one can understand the track-record from whence the Jagr trade was born. Nothing like an over-paid offensive player making a boatload of money on a team that is trying to rebuild itself and rehabilitate it's image.
Jagr has been outstanding since he joined the rangers. wow one bad game he isn't allowed to play one bad game. funny how lundmark plays 50 and you cry its his linemates.

sigh if larry brooks writes it you must agree

Son of Steinbrenner is offline  
Old
03-16-2004, 08:41 PM
  #7
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,006
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Steinbrenner
Jagr has been outstanding since he joined the rangers. wow one bad game he isn't allowed to play one bad game. funny how lundmark plays 50 and you cry its his linemates.

sigh if larry brooks writes it you must agree
I DID state facts though. Jagr is often hurt becuase of the groin. He, while playing very well, was not what this team needed. His $11m that will count against any kind of cap or luxury tax was not what this team needed.
Yes, Jagr has played well. But is he the type of player that this team needed? That's another story.

True Blue is offline  
Old
03-16-2004, 09:31 PM
  #8
Janerixon
Registered User
 
Janerixon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 3,730
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
I DID state facts though. Jagr is often hurt becuase of the groin. He, while playing very well, was not what this team needed. His $11m that will count against any kind of cap or luxury tax was not what this team needed.
Yes, Jagr has played well. But is he the type of player that this team needed? That's another story.
TB
jagr may not be what this team needed then or now, but hes here and he serves a new purpose

this is the ny rangers where you can always see a big name or two or 6, but now we have one and thats Jagr

and guess what he wants to be here, so im glad he is here, we need more players who actually want to be here

as for his salary, the caps take a hit for 4 million a year and he defered 1 million a season for a no trade clause, so we take a 6 million hit, not 11

if you want to complain about money and salary cap then holik is your man making 8.85 million a season

why sather didnt frontload that one, beyond me, he knew a new cba was coming in 2 years (when holik signed the deal) but hey 8.85 for holik for 5 years done

and he wants to play hardball with umberger who wants to be here

i still hate sather

Janerixon is offline  
Old
03-16-2004, 09:58 PM
  #9
BigE
Registered User
 
BigE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: San Francisco, CA
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,476
vCash: 500
Yeah, it could be worse. He could want to get out of here quicker than Holik and be totally impossible to deal with.

BigE is offline  
Old
03-16-2004, 10:07 PM
  #10
Evil Sather
YOU KILL THE JOE
 
Evil Sather's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: YOU MAKE SOME MO
Posts: 1,898
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Steinbrenner
Jagr has been outstanding since he joined the rangers. wow one bad game he isn't allowed to play one bad game. funny how lundmark plays 50 and you cry its his linemates.

sigh if larry brooks writes it you must agree
I do not agree understand you're Lundmark obsession, sir.

edit: Immaturity.


Last edited by Evil Sather: 03-16-2004 at 11:05 PM.
Evil Sather is offline  
Old
03-16-2004, 10:19 PM
  #11
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Whether you agree with SOS or not he does have the right to his opinion on the player considering this a hockey board. He hasnt insulted you or gotten out of line so it's okay.

Obviously you guys dont agree and that's fine.

Heck someone could think i am in love with Andrew Ladd after my posts of the past week.

SOS's views are certainly controversial but he does back them up with a point. Not saying i totally agree with him, but i think we can all at least respect that.

Edge is offline  
Old
03-17-2004, 07:03 AM
  #12
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,006
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Janerixon
and guess what he wants to be here, so im glad he is here, we need more players who actually want to be here

as for his salary, the caps take a hit for 4 million a year and he defered 1 million a season for a no trade clause, so we take a 6 million hit, not 11
I have to agree that jagr genuinely looks like he wants to be here. And for something more than just $$$.
However, I believe you are wrong. What he will count against the cap is his salary amount. We pick up the tab becuase we hold on to the player. The Caps do not absorb ANY of his cap hit.

True Blue is offline  
Old
03-17-2004, 07:46 AM
  #13
jas
Unsatisfied
 
jas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 13,018
vCash: 500
I gotta disagree, TB

Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
I have to agree that jagr genuinely looks like he wants to be here. And for something more than just $$$.
However, I believe you are wrong. What he will count against the cap is his salary amount. We pick up the tab becuase we hold on to the player. The Caps do not absorb ANY of his cap hit.
No agreement has been reached yet, so we don't know what will count. We don't know if there will be a a hard cap, a soft cap or a luxury tax. And, even if it is a hard cap, that would be fine in my eyes. If Sather/Dolan are restricted in the amount of salary spent, the less likely we will see an influx of UFAs. And, more young players will get opportunities. I understand why Jagr is here - this team needs at least one gate attraction. If Jagr is motivated and really wants to be here, I think he will still be successful. Unlike Lindros, he can carry a line by himself. (Just look at how Hlavac's game has been improved by playing next to Jagr.) I think Jagr could be successful next year even with a couple of kids on his line. Right now, Holik is more of a worry to me than Jagr.

jas is offline  
Old
03-17-2004, 08:19 AM
  #14
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,006
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jas
No agreement has been reached yet, so we don't know what will count. We don't know if there will be a a hard cap, a soft cap or a luxury tax.
We have EVERY other sport to use as a model. I know that all sports are different, but the one thing they ALL have in common is that the team that holds said players contract is the one responsible 100% for the cap hit. When I say cap, I mean cap soft or hard and luxury tax treshold. That's the one thing that does not change from sport to sport. It's nice to hope that Washington will be responsible for $5m of a hit against any cap, but that is just not realistic. No matter how you front-load or back-load contracts, their value is what counts against.
So while, no, we don't know what the outcome of the CBA war will be. We already have a pretty good educated guess as to what the Rangers will have as far as a cap hit goes.

True Blue is offline  
Old
03-17-2004, 08:22 AM
  #15
Melrose_Jr.
Registered User
 
Melrose_Jr.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Providence, RI
Country: United States
Posts: 10,692
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Janerixon
jagr may not be what this team needed then or now, but hes here and he serves a new purpose
I think most people are missing the point. He's a player with a chronic injury. How much longer is Sather going to hang the hopes of the team on a player with a serious, recurring ailment? Can you remind me when this high risk strategy has worked for us in the past 4 years again?

Melrose_Jr. is offline  
Old
03-17-2004, 08:55 AM
  #16
jas
Unsatisfied
 
jas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 13,018
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
We have EVERY other sport to use as a model. I know that all sports are different, but the one thing they ALL have in common is that the team that holds said players contract is the one responsible 100% for the cap hit. When I say cap, I mean cap soft or hard and luxury tax treshold. That's the one thing that does not change from sport to sport. It's nice to hope that Washington will be responsible for $5m of a hit against any cap, but that is just not realistic. No matter how you front-load or back-load contracts, their value is what counts against.
So while, no, we don't know what the outcome of the CBA war will be. We already have a pretty good educated guess as to what the Rangers will have as far as a cap hit goes.
But even if that's the case, and the Rangers are responsible for the $11 million, there are other factors involved - if it's a luxury tax, do you think the Dolans won't spend additional money; what if each team is allowed one superstar exception, as many people have talked about in the NBA; what if the contracts are allowed to be grandfathered in, so that teams over the cap have team to get under the cap? And, if there is a hard cap, considering how foolishly this organization has spent money, it is less likely they will be able to go out and flood the team with UFAs this off-season.


Last edited by jas: 03-17-2004 at 09:22 PM.
jas is offline  
Old
03-17-2004, 07:27 PM
  #17
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Tromelin
Posts: 9,481
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melrose_Jr.
I think most people are missing the point. He's a player with a chronic injury. How much longer is Sather going to hang the hopes of the team on a player with a serious, recurring ailment? Can you remind me when this high risk strategy has worked for us in the past 4 years again?
with all due respect in the past 4 years jagr has missed 25 games due to injury. i don't think that he has a chronic injury problem. if you look at forsberg kariya or selanne they have missed MORE time. not everybody can be healthy. the rangers gave up nothing for jagr. the rangers are paying him 6 million a year. a first line built around jagr is a great first line. it remains to be seen what players the rangers will play with jagr in the future but i think he was a great pickup. honestly who would you rather have anson carter or jagr?

Son of Steinbrenner is offline  
Old
03-17-2004, 07:51 PM
  #18
in the hall
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 5,009
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Steinbrenner
with all due respect in the past 4 years jagr has missed 25 games due to injury. i don't think that he has a chronic injury problem. if you look at forsberg kariya or selanne they have missed MORE time. not everybody can be healthy. the rangers gave up nothing for jagr. the rangers are paying him 6 million a year. a first line built around jagr is a great first line. it remains to be seen what players the rangers will play with jagr in the future but i think he was a great pickup. honestly who would you rather have anson carter or jagr?
if each of those 25 games were because of his groin then id say that is chronic since chronic means recurring... the fact hes had this groin problem since his pitt days alone makes it a chronic injury.. who can forget that jagr peanut butter which he created and actually sold.. he started it off by using the peanut butter as a soothener on his groin area then ended up starting his own line..

i wonder what he did to get it off... i hope he didnt have a dog back then

in the hall is offline  
Old
03-17-2004, 08:26 PM
  #19
nyr5186
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: New Orleans
Country: Madagascar
Posts: 2,701
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by in the hall
if each of those 25 games were because of his groin then id say that is chronic since chronic means recurring... the fact hes had this groin problem since his pitt days alone makes it a chronic injury.. who can forget that jagr peanut butter which he created and actually sold.. he started it off by using the peanut butter as a soothener on his groin area then ended up starting his own line..

i wonder what he did to get it off... i hope he didnt have a dog back then
Hey, it wouldn't be cheating 'cause its his dog. But at least we finally know why his girlfriend broke up with him.

nyr5186 is offline  
Old
03-18-2004, 12:40 AM
  #20
Brooklyn Ranger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn, of course
Posts: 7,682
vCash: 500
Dogs generally don't like peanut butter--it sticks to the roof of their mouths (and they tend to have trouble swallowing it too).

Brooklyn Ranger is online now  
Old
03-18-2004, 06:34 AM
  #21
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,112
vCash: 500
But it's a great treat, Brooklyn...

give them a glob and they get out of your hair for a few minutes. My dog's picky, though, preferring her peanut butter with bread and jelly. [trying to stay away from where the conversation seemed to be going]

Fletch is offline  
Old
03-18-2004, 07:37 AM
  #22
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,006
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Steinbrenner
the rangers gave up nothing for jagr. the rangers are paying him 6 million a year. a first line built around jagr is a great first line. it remains to be seen what players the rangers will play with jagr in the future but i think he was a great pickup. honestly who would you rather have anson carter or jagr?
The Rangers may not have given up much for Jagr, however if you are a rebuilding team, then why have a player like that? Rangers biggest problems were defense and clearing the crease and Jagr addresses none of those. One can make a case that Washington won the deal becuase they turned around and dealt Carter for a prospect. One can make a case that had the Rangers never dealt for Jagr, they would have been able to have another prospect becuase they could have dealt Carter themselves. So the argument of "who would you rather have, Carter or Jagr is moot". A true rebuilding team would have neither. And the Caps don't.
The Caps also freed themselves of any potential cap hit by trading Jagr. Instead the Rangers are going to be a rebuilding team that is taking an immidiate cap hit of $11m by having Jagr.
One cannot dispute that Jagr has played well since he has arrived here. However, when you are in a rebuilding mode, that's the player that you trade for a prospect. The Caps managed to do that AND lower their salary against any cap or luxury tax. The Rangers did not.

True Blue is offline  
Old
03-18-2004, 08:55 AM
  #23
jas
Unsatisfied
 
jas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 13,018
vCash: 500
But my question to you, TB is this...

Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
The Rangers may not have given up much for Jagr, however if you are a rebuilding team, then why have a player like that? Rangers biggest problems were defense and clearing the crease and Jagr addresses none of those. One can make a case that Washington won the deal becuase they turned around and dealt Carter for a prospect. One can make a case that had the Rangers never dealt for Jagr, they would have been able to have another prospect becuase they could have dealt Carter themselves. So the argument of "who would you rather have, Carter or Jagr is moot". A true rebuilding team would have neither. And the Caps don't.
The Caps also freed themselves of any potential cap hit by trading Jagr. Instead the Rangers are going to be a rebuilding team that is taking an immidiate cap hit of $11m by having Jagr.
One cannot dispute that Jagr has played well since he has arrived here. However, when you are in a rebuilding mode, that's the player that you trade for a prospect. The Caps managed to do that AND lower their salary against any cap or luxury tax. The Rangers did not.
do you really want to add salary next year? If Jagr's ticket will be a deterrent or a burden on the Rangers' salary structure, then we won't see a rash of UFAs brought in, because they won't have the room for it. Therefore, more young players are likely to get a chance at playing for this this. Jagr has said he wants to be here. Granted, he made a rather ignorant statement about the fans not allowing for rebuilding, when we all know it's the media which completely intolerant of one. But, unlike Holik, who is walking around in a daze and I'm a little concerned about having around, Jagr seems to be enthused at being a Ranger. He gives the Dolan's the big ticket player they sell advertising around, and he can still be a dominant offensive player, something this team will need while the Balejs, Umbergers, Tyutins, Kondratievs and Ovechkins ( ) are finding their way.

jas is offline  
Old
03-18-2004, 11:29 AM
  #24
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,006
vCash: 500
I actually look at it in a different way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jas
do you really want to add salary next year? If Jagr's ticket will be a deterrent or a burden on the Rangers' salary structure, then we won't see a rash of UFAs brought in, because they won't have the room for it.
We could have probably used the $6m of his salary in a better fashion. Not to mention the fact that we would not have had the $11m hit against any type of cap/luxury tax.

True Blue is offline  
Old
03-18-2004, 04:58 PM
  #25
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Tromelin
Posts: 9,481
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
We could have probably used the $6m of his salary in a better fashion. Not to mention the fact that we would not have had the $11m hit against any type of cap/luxury tax.
hmm why are you so sure jagr will count 11 million againts the salary cap? wait i know you read larry brooks say it but when is he ever right? most informed people think the nhl will have a grandfather clause for contracts.

Son of Steinbrenner 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 12:06 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.