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

First round picks under Sather

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-03-2009, 05:47 PM
  #1
Duponttime*
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 511
vCash: 500
First round picks under Sather

People seem to complain about them but if you look, under Sather other than some bad luck, they have been a lot better than our previous GM's. Jessiman was obviously the worst one. Cherepanov was a pick he had to make and unfortunately he was a tragic loss. Blackburn to me was going to be a star. That really hurt. The Montoya pick wasn't great but I think with the third we got when Sather dealt him they used on Grachev.

Other than that, Del Zotto and Sanguinetti look like future blocks on our defense. Staal already is a force on our blueline. Korpikoski long term looks to be a good pro in the making. So over the past few years, it looks like Sather and his crew will have added 3 vital parts of our top 6 defenseman with the organizations first round picks. They made up with the Jessiman blunder with Lundqvist who is more important than just about any pick we could have made. Grachev will go a long way to making up for the Montoya pick. Korpikoski should be a very valuable forward.

Our second round picks included Stepan, LaFleur, Anisimov, Sauer, Byers, Dubinsky, Baranka and Tyutin. LaFeur stinks but you can't win them all. Olver and Graham weren't any good either.

I think Sather has done a pretty good job with his scouts of adding a lot of talent to this team. Most of the hatred for Sather comes from the fact he's just so arrogant and unfriendly to Rangers fans. Personally, I don't care how he acts as long as he keeps adding young talent to the team so they can make a run at a cup one day.

Duponttime* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2009, 05:49 PM
  #2
ecemleafs
Registered User
 
ecemleafs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 12,303
vCash: 500
we got the 3rd for grachev in the cullen deal i believe.

ecemleafs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2009, 05:53 PM
  #3
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 16,565
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by youarentobjective View Post
People seem to complain about them but if you look, under Sather other than some bad luck, they have been a lot better than our previous GM's. Jessiman was obviously the worst one. Cherepanov was a pick he had to make and unfortunately he was a tragic loss. Blackburn to me was going to be a star. That really hurt. The Montoya pick wasn't great but I think with the third we got when Sather dealt him they used on Grachev.

Other than that, Del Zotto and Sanguinetti look like future blocks on our defense. Staal already is a force on our blueline. Korpikoski long term looks to be a good pro in the making. So over the past few years, it looks like Sather and his crew will have added 3 vital parts of our top 6 defenseman with the organizations first round picks. They made up with the Jessiman blunder with Lundqvist who is more important than just about any pick we could have made. Grachev will go a long way to making up for the Montoya pick. Korpikoski should be a very valuable forward.

Our second round picks included Stepan, LaFleur, Anisimov, Sauer, Byers, Dubinsky, Baranka and Tyutin. LaFeur stinks but you can't win them all. Olver and Graham weren't any good either.

I think Sather has done a pretty good job with his scouts of adding a lot of talent to this team. Most of the hatred for Sather comes from the fact he's just so arrogant and unfriendly to Rangers fans. Personally, I don't care how he acts as long as he keeps adding young talent to the team so they can make a run at a cup one day.
Other than Cherepanov being dead, and Staal being a big contributor, the other names you mentioned have either been traded, have not played a significant role in the NHL, or have not played in the NHL at all....so I dont know how the hell you could classify them as young talent that will make a run at the cup. Its absurd and ignorant.

Bleed Ranger Blue is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2009, 06:06 PM
  #4
KreiMeARiver*
Have Confidence
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UES
Posts: 6,621
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Other than Cherepanov being dead, and Staal being a big contributor, the other names you mentioned have either been traded, have not played a significant role in the NHL, or have not played in the NHL at all....so I dont know how the hell you could classify them as young talent that will make a run at the cup. Its absurd and ignorant.
I totally agree.... throwing B/C prospects at me really doesn't get my blood flowing. We were terrible for 10 years and have no real offensive stars to show for it. It's a joke.

KreiMeARiver* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2009, 06:45 PM
  #5
JerseyRangers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Jersey City, NJ
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 1,621
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hightide85 View Post
I totally agree.... throwing B/C prospects at me really doesn't get my blood flowing. We were terrible for 10 years and have no real offensive stars to show for it. It's a joke.
Not sure how anyone makes the statement that we were terrible. The worst we ever got was mediocare. We usually where in the playoff race until the last week or two in the season even when we didn't make the playoffs. That's always been the problem. The teams that are great now defined terrible at some point. The Chicago's, Pissburgh's, Washington's all had lottery picks. The Ovechkin, Backstrom, Kane, Toewes, Malkin and Crosby picks were absolute no brainers.

Here's a big clue. With the rare exception (Red Wings being that exception) the team that consistently picks higher will usually uncover the top players. To me if your going to rate a teams drafting look from the 2nd round down. Then it becomes more about scouting, coaching and development then not dropping the ball. With the exception of Milbury there isn't one gm that could have dropped the ball on the above mentioned players!

JerseyRangers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2009, 07:23 PM
  #6
dedalus
Registered User
 
dedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,215
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by youarentobjective View Post
Most of the hatred for Sather comes from the fact he's just so arrogant and unfriendly to Rangers fans.
Wow. Your ability to read the minds of Ranger fans is pretty amazing. Never mind what they might give as their complaints against Sather, YOU will tell us the REAL reason, eh?

dedalus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2009, 07:58 PM
  #7
gravytrain6t
Registered User
 
gravytrain6t's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 2,867
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dedalus View Post
Wow. Your ability to read the minds of Ranger fans is pretty amazing. Never mind what they might give as their complaints against Sather, YOU will tell us the REAL reason, eh?
And what are your complaints about our first round draft picks if you have any? Do you not like Sangs, DZ, Staal, or Cherepanov?

You might want to look around the league and you'll find that many teams are struggling. But at least we made it to the playoffs 4 years straight. I'm sure you were happy to see the team back where it belongs. In the playoffs. Or am i wrong?

gravytrain6t is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2009, 08:14 PM
  #8
beastly115
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 11,020
vCash: 500
Our farm is pretty average compared to the rest of the league. We're in the same boat most other clubs are in - we have a few guys projected to be top 6, a wide range of mediocre prospects, and a few bums. We're not well off by any means.

beastly115 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2009, 08:14 PM
  #9
DarthSather99
Registered User
 
DarthSather99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 3,270
vCash: 500
I think more so recently, Gordie Clarke and the scouts have assembled the list from which we pick players. Sather will handle the trades.

DarthSather99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2009, 08:16 PM
  #10
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 9,898
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by youarentobjective View Post
People seem to complain about them but if you look, under Sather other than some bad luck, they have been a lot better than our previous GM's. Jessiman was obviously the worst one. Cherepanov was a pick he had to make and unfortunately he was a tragic loss. Blackburn to me was going to be a star. That really hurt. The Montoya pick wasn't great but I think with the third we got when Sather dealt him they used on Grachev.

Other than that, Del Zotto and Sanguinetti look like future blocks on our defense. Staal already is a force on our blueline. Korpikoski long term looks to be a good pro in the making. So over the past few years, it looks like Sather and his crew will have added 3 vital parts of our top 6 defenseman with the organizations first round picks. They made up with the Jessiman blunder with Lundqvist who is more important than just about any pick we could have made. Grachev will go a long way to making up for the Montoya pick. Korpikoski should be a very valuable forward.
Staal is the only one who's done anything in the NHL. Who told you that Pasta and Dizzy will be blueline building blocks? Was it God or a really good psychic? Because otherwise, I doubt that we know that they'll be more than Montoya. Same for Grachev. Same for Blackburn and Cherry: neither proved anything in the NHL. I remember when Cloutier was touted as much as Blackburn, so what? He turned into a low-end starter / solid backup, but certainly not the franchise goalie he was projected to be in 1995.

Cherry a superstar? I remember the same and MUCH MORE being said about Dube. What proof is there?

Quote:

Our second round picks included Stepan, LaFleur, Anisimov, Sauer, Byers, Dubinsky, Baranka and Tyutin. LaFeur stinks but you can't win them all. Olver and Graham weren't any good either.
Laf is already known to be a terrible pick, as were Olver and Graham. Dubi was excellent, as was Tyutin. Baranka probably will be nothing. Byers wasn't worth a second round pick even if he does turn into a 4th liner on par with Betts.

Anisimov and Sauer are still unknowns.

The second round wasn't all that bad considering that it's a second round, but nothing phenomenal either because we didn't get any stars like Richter, Weight or Norstrom, all former second rounders.

Beacon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2009, 08:20 PM
  #11
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 16,565
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by youarentobjective View Post
Most of the hatred for Sather comes from the fact he's just so arrogant and unfriendly to Rangers fans. Personally, I don't care how he acts as long as he keeps adding young talent to the team so they can make a run at a cup one day.
I wouldnt care if Sather flipped off the fans on their way into the arena and spit on them from his luxury suite if it brought another cup to NY.

I am not a fan of him because he amassed a mediocre (Yes, mediocre) crop of prospects over the last 9 years, but mostly because he has no clue what hes doing in free agency.

Bleed Ranger Blue is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2009, 08:24 PM
  #12
nyr2k2
Can't Beat Him
 
nyr2k2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 24,975
vCash: 50
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynHockey99 View Post
Staal is the only one who's done anything in the NHL. Who told you that Pasta and Dizzy will be blueline building blocks? Was it God or a really good psychic? Because otherwise, I doubt that we know that they'll be more than Montoya. Same for Grachev. Same for Blackburn and Cherry: neither proved anything in the NHL. I remember when Cloutier was touted as much as Blackburn, so what? He turned into a low-end starter / solid backup, but certainly not the franchise goalie he was projected to be in 1995.

Cherry a superstar? I remember the same and MUCH MORE being said about Dube. What proof is there?

...

Laf is already known to be a terrible pick, as were Olver and Graham. Dubi was excellent, as was Tyutin. Baranka probably will be nothing. Byers wasn't worth a second round pick even if he does turn into a 4th liner on par with Betts.

Anisimov and Sauer are still unknowns.

The second round wasn't all that bad considering that it's a second round, but nothing phenomenal either because we didn't get any stars like Richter, Weight or Norstrom, all former second rounders.
Terrific post, thanks BH99.

nyr2k2 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2009, 08:32 PM
  #13
gravytrain6t
Registered User
 
gravytrain6t's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 2,867
vCash: 500
Look at Grachev's rookie season. Duchene can easily be a number 2 overall pick. I think Grachev's other super talent teammate (Hodgson) went at number 10 with the Canucks. If anyone watched the World Juniors you would probably agree Grachev has the potential to be as good or better than either one of those players. Especially now he's switching to the wing. Exactly what we needed. A developing pf.

Between the upcoming drafts, DZ, Sangs, Grachev, Anisimov, Dubinsky, Callahan and Staal....I see a bright future there. They're all not number one picks but it doesn't mean they won't develop or be lacking the talent to compete with the kids that were drafted in the first round. I forgot Byers, Sauer, Doyle, 3 young kids including Stepan among others. IMO the future is looking as good as it's looked in a really long time.

Sather or Smith, IDC. It's possible Staal, or Lundqvist are the best draft picks we've had since Patrick selected Leetch.

gravytrain6t is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2009, 08:33 PM
  #14
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,230
vCash: 500
Some people are so self loathing toward this organization, that it makes me wonder why they are fans.

If some of our prospects were in other systems people here would be gushing over them.

Is it REALLY that hard to appreciate the talent we have developing in our system?

Anisimov was the top young player in the AHL this year.

Del Zotto was a top defenseman in the CHL.

Grachev was a top forward in the CHL.

Kundratek was the highest ranked Czech in the draft last year, and has been nothing short of solid. He could be in the AHL next season as a 19 year old defenseman. That is impressive.

Sanguinetti is only 21 and was able to produce in the AHL, he still needs some work defensively, though.

Derek Stepan has so far exceeded expectations as a freshman at Wisconsin.

Name one organization that has can't miss prospects top to bottom.

We have a few top guys that have 90% chance of being full time contributors at the NHL level. How exactly does that make our system poor?

No NHL team is comprised fully of homegrown talent.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2009, 08:37 PM
  #15
nyr2k2
Can't Beat Him
 
nyr2k2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 24,975
vCash: 50
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupersonicMonkey View Post
Some people are so self loathing toward this organization, that it makes me wonder why they are fans.

If some of our prospects were in other systems people here would be gushing over them.

Is it REALLY that hard to appreciate the talent we have developing in our system?

Anisimov was the top young player in the AHL this year.

Del Zotto was a top defenseman in the CHL.

Grachev was a top forward in the CHL.

Kundratek was the highest ranked Czech in the draft last year, and has been nothing short of solid. He could be in the AHL next season as a 19 year old defenseman. That is impressive.

Sanguinetti is only 21 and was able to produce in the AHL, he still needs some work defensively, though.

Derek Stepan has so far exceeded expectations as a freshman at Wisconsin.

Name one organization that has can't miss prospects top to bottom.

We have a few top guys that have 90% chance of being full time contributors at the NHL level. How exactly does that make our system poor?

No NHL team is comprised fully of homegrown talent.
I don't think anyone is arguing that the system, as it currently stands, is anything less than solid. The discussion so far has been about what Sather has done in the first round of the draft in his tenure here.

nyr2k2 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2009, 08:44 PM
  #16
OverTheCap
Registered User
 
OverTheCap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 10,050
vCash: 500
It's way too premature to start praising Sather for his drafting ability when a lot of these prospects have yet to play one game in the NHL. Although we have high expectations for players such as DZ and Grachev, no one knows how they will fare in the NHL.

And Sather's drafts from the early 2000's were pretty horrendous. Obviously 2003 was a mess, and 2002 was an embarrassment with the exception of Prucha. Hopefully we are headed in the right direction, but Sather's drafting miscues during the Dark Ages make me hesitant to heap praise upon him for his "great" drafting skills (Lee Falardeau, anyone?).

OverTheCap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2009, 08:53 PM
  #17
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,230
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nyr2k2 View Post
I don't think anyone is arguing that the system, as it currently stands, is anything less than solid. The discussion so far has been about what Sather has done in the first round of the draft in his tenure here.
I understand that.

But, you gotta give the recent picks their time to reach the NHL.

You can't expect a first round pick to reach the NHL the year or even the year after they are drafted, most of the time.

Not unless you are a perennial lottery team.

Teams like Tampa, LA, Atlanta, etc... have the luxury of playing their recent picks. But they are also bad teams.

The Rangers have at least remained competitive. And have had draft picks/undrafted free agents play major contributions at the same time.

Let some of these guys reach the NHL.

Del Zotto may break camp with the team. Sanguinetti may be promoted later in the year... those are possibilities. Anisimov looks like a lock to make the club out of camp. And Grachev also has a chance to reach the NHL at some point this coming season.

In recent years we have drafted well.

Every organization has their busts. They also have their gems.

The salary cap is the best thing in modern history to happen to the Rangers. It is allowing the organization to realize the value in drafting and/or developing its own talent. Yes, Sather has still been bad with handing out some bad contracts, but we also have some promising young players to be excited about.


Last edited by SupersonicMonkey*: 06-03-2009 at 08:59 PM.
SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2009, 09:11 PM
  #18
nyr2k2
Can't Beat Him
 
nyr2k2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 24,975
vCash: 50
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupersonicMonkey View Post
I understand that.

But, you gotta give the recent picks their time to reach the NHL.

You can't expect a first round pick to reach the NHL the year or even the year after they are drafted, most of the time.

Not unless you are a perennial lottery team.
I agree completely.

If the thread was titled "Sather's first few first rounds sucked" or "The last few drafts looks promising," I think we'd all be in agreement.

nyr2k2 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2009, 09:32 PM
  #19
dedalus
Registered User
 
dedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,215
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gravytrain6t View Post
And what are your complaints about our first round draft picks if you have any? Do you not like Sangs, DZ, Staal, or Cherepanov?

You might want to look around the league and you'll find that many teams are struggling. But at least we made it to the playoffs 4 years straight. I'm sure you were happy to see the team back where it belongs. In the playoffs. Or am i wrong?
Feel free to check my many prior statements on all this. You'll find a search function under profiles.

And now that that's out of the way, would you care to actually address my point? If you're going to toss in your two cents, you might at least be topical.

dedalus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2009, 10:42 PM
  #20
eco's bones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Elmira NY
Country: United States
Posts: 14,293
vCash: 500
I think there is some reason for optimism for the current group of prospects but it doesn't look as if we have anywhere near the elite talent at forward to match what the best young upcoming teams in our conference have--namely the Caps and the Pens nor do we have the veteran support systems that the Bruins or the Red Wings have to offer their young prospects and so any talk of runs for the cup in the near future is IMO really premature.

Overall as GM for the past 9 years if I were to grade Sather it would be like a D-. He's not been that good. There have been some nice trades--numerous poor free agent signings--he kind of decided after 3-4 years of failure that he maybe should pay more attention to player development which was nice as well but I do wonder why it took him so long. His ability to manage the team in this cap era has been getting worse instead of better. I don't know what to make of that. I think practically every other GM who has managed to keep his job in this period has figured it out a lot better than he has. The Jessiman draft by the way was atrocious.

eco's bones is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2009, 11:47 PM
  #21
Edge
Kris King's Ghost
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Amish Paradise
Country: United States
Posts: 13,891
vCash: 500
If the Rangers could find players in the top 60, they'd be in pretty good shape. They've found solid players in the later rounds.

I think what hurts this team is two main factors.

From 1997 to 2007, three of their first round picks have had their careers cut short. Ironically enough, all three were no less than probable NHL'ers.

I just don't think you can look at this team and not say that their 2002 and 2003 drafts were damn near crippling. I'm not going to beat the Farladeau/Jessiman horse to death again, but when you make decisions like that in back to back years, it's going to hurt for a long time.

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2009, 11:48 PM
  #22
Edge
Kris King's Ghost
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Amish Paradise
Country: United States
Posts: 13,891
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eco's bones View Post
I think there is some reason for optimism for the current group of prospects but it doesn't look as if we have anywhere near the elite talent at forward to match what the best young upcoming teams in our conference have--namely the Caps and the Pens nor do we have the veteran support systems that the Bruins or the Red Wings have to offer their young prospects and so any talk of runs for the cup in the near future is IMO really premature.

Overall as GM for the past 9 years if I were to grade Sather it would be like a D-. He's not been that good. There have been some nice trades--numerous poor free agent signings--he kind of decided after 3-4 years of failure that he maybe should pay more attention to player development which was nice as well but I do wonder why it took him so long. His ability to manage the team in this cap era has been getting worse instead of better. I don't know what to make of that. I think practically every other GM who has managed to keep his job in this period has figured it out a lot better than he has. The Jessiman draft by the way was atrocious.

I think your first line is a bullseye. I said something very similar in another thread.

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2009, 12:07 AM
  #23
FLYLine24
The Mac Truck
 
FLYLine24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: NY
Country: United States
Posts: 32,688
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphaqup View Post
Our farm is pretty average compared to the rest of the league. We're in the same boat most other clubs are in - we have a few guys projected to be top 6, a wide range of mediocre prospects, and a few bums. We're not well off by any means.

Disagree. Over the past few years our drafting have been above average (for the first time in a decade). We have a bunch of home grown players (Lundqvist, Cally, Dubi, Staal, Korpi and im going to count Girardi even though he was signed as a FA). Those players are all recently drafted and already making a good impact on the team. Add also our 2 very good D prospects(Sangs and DZ), and add our 2 very good offensive prospects (AA and Grachev). And, RIP, lets not forget what could have been the offensive superstar we have been looking for....that cannot be discarded in this conversation.

Right now, we are sitting very nice with the youth, nothing average about that.

Since 2004...Sather and company gets a very respectable B+ from me in the drafting.

FLYLine24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2009, 12:37 AM
  #24
gravytrain6t
Registered User
 
gravytrain6t's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 2,867
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dedalus View Post
Feel free to check my many prior statements on all this. You'll find a search function under profiles.

And now that that's out of the way, would you care to actually address my point? If you're going to toss in your two cents, you might at least be topical.
It's not that complicated Dedalus. Do you like the past few first round draft picks or not?? If not. Why not? It's a yes or no answer. You make no sense at all btw. ("I may as well be topical.") Everything I have said on this thread is right on topic. Go back and READ. I'm not discussing the NY Mets. Stay with me now.

gravytrain6t is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2009, 02:59 AM
  #25
NYR Sting
Heart and Soul
 
NYR Sting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by youarentobjective View Post
People seem to complain about them but if you look, under Sather other than some bad luck, they have been a lot better than our previous GM's. Jessiman was obviously the worst one. Cherepanov was a pick he had to make and unfortunately he was a tragic loss. Blackburn to me was going to be a star. That really hurt. The Montoya pick wasn't great but I think with the third we got when Sather dealt him they used on Grachev.

Other than that, Del Zotto and Sanguinetti look like future blocks on our defense. Staal already is a force on our blueline. Korpikoski long term looks to be a good pro in the making. So over the past few years, it looks like Sather and his crew will have added 3 vital parts of our top 6 defenseman with the organizations first round picks. They made up with the Jessiman blunder with Lundqvist who is more important than just about any pick we could have made. Grachev will go a long way to making up for the Montoya pick. Korpikoski should be a very valuable forward.

Our second round picks included Stepan, LaFleur, Anisimov, Sauer, Byers, Dubinsky, Baranka and Tyutin. LaFeur stinks but you can't win them all. Olver and Graham weren't any good either.

I think Sather has done a pretty good job with his scouts of adding a lot of talent to this team. Most of the hatred for Sather comes from the fact he's just so arrogant and unfriendly to Rangers fans. Personally, I don't care how he acts as long as he keeps adding young talent to the team so they can make a run at a cup one day.
Bad luck? LOL. Interesting way to twist the situation to make your point. People couldn't care less how Sather behaved if he was a good GM, but he isn't. The reason people don't like Sather is that for the past 20 years, he's easily been one of the worst GMs in the league. I've lost track of the number of times in both Edmonton and New York that he should have been fired and wasn't. From 1982-1999 his drafting record is so hilariously pathetic, it's only overshadowed by how enormous his mistakes drafting were with this team.

Nothing around here irks me more than people underestimating just how important the 2003 and 2004 drafts were for this team, and how badly Sather ****ed up the most important moments this team had during his tenure.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Other than Cherepanov being dead, and Staal being a big contributor, the other names you mentioned have either been traded, have not played a significant role in the NHL, or have not played in the NHL at all....so I dont know how the hell you could classify them as young talent that will make a run at the cup. Its absurd and ignorant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hightide85 View Post
I totally agree.... throwing B/C prospects at me really doesn't get my blood flowing. We were terrible for 10 years and have no real offensive stars to show for it. It's a joke.
Exactly. 1999 set this franchise back so far. That was supposed to be our entire future, and it was a total failure. Now we didn't have first round picks in 2000 or 2002, but after the ugliness of 1999, the importance of the 2001, 2003, and 2004 drafts can't be understated. Those were our chances to recover from 99, to try and rectify the fact that we had no star talent in our system, and nothing to rebuild a foundation on after the veterans from the 94 era called it a day.

Those drafts, especially 03 and 04, were so important for this franchise. So what did Sather do? He ****ed up each and everyone of them, setting this franchise back a decade at least. Three chances to change the course of this team's future, and he struck out each time. It's no surprise though, because that's what he's done every time he's had to make a major decision with serious long-term implications for the franchise. It's what he did when he signed Gomez and Drury, and it's what he did with Redden. Not coming away with at least ONE major talent from those three incredibly important drafts is an absolute travesty, and all the other reasons that he deserved to be fired aside, he should have been fired just for that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by eco's bones View Post
I think there is some reason for optimism for the current group of prospects but it doesn't look as if we have anywhere near the elite talent at forward to match what the best young upcoming teams in our conference have--namely the Caps and the Pens nor do we have the veteran support systems that the Bruins or the Red Wings have to offer their young prospects and so any talk of runs for the cup in the near future is IMO really premature.

Overall as GM for the past 9 years if I were to grade Sather it would be like a D-. He's not been that good. There have been some nice trades--numerous poor free agent signings--he kind of decided after 3-4 years of failure that he maybe should pay more attention to player development which was nice as well but I do wonder why it took him so long. His ability to manage the team in this cap era has been getting worse instead of better. I don't know what to make of that. I think practically every other GM who has managed to keep his job in this period has figured it out a lot better than he has. The Jessiman draft by the way was atrocious.
Agreed. It's funny how virtually ever other GM that has failed to adapt to the cap has been jettisoned, or is well on his way to losing his job. And GMs who set their teams back with horrible picks and/or trades of the magnitude that Sather has this team have all lost their jobs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gravytrain6t View Post
It's not that complicated Dedalus. Do you like the past few first round draft picks or not?? If not. Why not? It's a yes or no answer. You make no sense at all btw. ("I may as well be topical.") Everything I have said on this thread is right on topic. Go back and READ. I'm not discussing the NY Mets. Stay with me now.
I'm going to answer for Dadelus, and say that the past few draft picks aren't the issue, because none of them have proven anything yet. There are however numerous picks that have already gotten to the point where you can determine their level of success, and aside from Staal, they've all been colossal failures. Combine that with the previous 17 years of atrocious drafting, you can surely understand how any rational person would be hesitant to declare Sather a great drafter, considering how terrible his history since 1982 has been. Maybe you can explain why people should think he's a great drafter, when almost everything he's done throughout his career has been ****. And before you bring it up, we're all well aware of how great a drafter he was from 1979-1981. But three years vs. 20 years...that's a pretty lopsided difference there, IMO.

NYR Sting is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 03:21 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.