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

Sather: Goal is a long run of success

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-31-2010, 11:03 AM
  #51
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 30,597
vCash: 500
Awards:
If the goal was/is a long run of success, working toward that goal should have started a decade ago.

__________________
SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2010, 11:03 AM
  #52
Shadowtron
Registered User
 
Shadowtron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,534
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NikC View Post
There was snarkiness, aggression, and labeling on both sides from various posters involved.
Even though I called out the org. pretty I did preface along the way throughout my
Posting, even more so in the more recent posts on the subject matter.
Let me be more clear...it was the fact that we were in general agreement that bothered me. What were we arguing for? There are people on this board who will never completely allow themselves to critique this team. You aren't one of those people. But you were arguing as if you were. It made the whole thing seem rather pointless and felt like arguing for argument's sake.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NikC View Post
I’m not forcing people to see what I see. Calling for balance means both sides see each others points and
Coexist without one demonizing the other.

I was generalizing. Didn't mean you specifically.


Last edited by Shadowtron: 08-31-2010 at 11:19 AM.
Shadowtron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2010, 11:49 AM
  #53
NikC
Registered User
 
NikC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 3,810
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadowtron View Post
Let me be more clear...it was the fact that we were in general agreement that bothered me. What were we arguing for? There are people on this board who will never completely allow themselves to critique this team. You aren't one of those people. But you were arguing as if you were. It made the whole thing seem rather pointless and felt like arguing for argument's sake.




I was generalizing. Didn't mean you specifically.
fair enough. I think we're on common ground here somewhat.

NikC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2010, 12:32 PM
  #54
Trxjw
Retired.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 17,472
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
If the goal was/is a long run of success, working toward that goal should have started a decade ago.
Bingo. This is nothing more than the organization trying to spin the current cap situation in a positive light. They're not looking towards the future by choice; They've simply forced themselves into that position by handing out horrible contracts.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of many of our prospects (*cough* <---), but saying "We've always looked towards the future" after all this time is nothing more than a load of BS.

Trxjw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2010, 12:49 PM
  #55
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 16,302
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trxjw View Post
Bingo. This is nothing more than the organization trying to spin the current cap situation in a positive light. They're not looking towards the future by choice; They've simply forced themselves into that position by handing out horrible contracts.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of many of our prospects (*cough* <---), but saying "We've always looked towards the future" after all this time is nothing more than a load of BS.
Agreed. I just think too many people are expecting this lip service as some sort of legitimate long-term plan. Its not...it never was...and it probably never will be.

In your heart of hearts, whats a more likely scenario:
1. Our prospects all pan out great, some at an elite level, and this team grows together into a young and consistent force in the NHL
2. We have another round of Dubinsky/Callahan-type prospects come up in the next couple of years (nice players, good to have..but limited in some ways and certainly not elite) and Sather, or whoever is at the helm by then, blows their load on expensive free agents?

If you've been paying attention the last decade, I think its pretty clearcut where this is going. Hell, screw the last 10 years, how about the last 70? It seems the Rangers are destined to emcompass mediocrity.

Playoff revenue being a main goal is a big reason why.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2010, 12:52 PM
  #56
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 30,597
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trxjw View Post
Bingo. This is nothing more than the organization trying to spin the current cap situation in a positive light. They're not looking towards the future by choice; They've simply forced themselves into that position by handing out horrible contracts.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of many of our prospects (*cough* <---), but saying "We've always looked towards the future" after all this time is nothing more than a load of BS.
After ten years they should be either close to competing for a Cup or have an elite farm system (LA, NAS).

SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2010, 02:39 PM
  #57
Disgraced Cosmonaut
Registered User
 
Disgraced Cosmonaut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,531
vCash: 500
sather is full of crap- everyone should almost preface any post involving him with that. it's true. period. full stop.... but the prospect base right now is very good and he's been here for that. the defense in the pipeline is the best it's been in forever (since developing leetch and zubov). the offense is not as convincing, but there are some nice players. no studs (a la kovalev) but nice nonetheless. i won't blame him ENTIRELY for not coming up with another messier or kurri (forget about the great one, a one in a million). the problem is, some of the years where the team didn't draft well (2003) or drafted late-to-start were totally his fault.

Disgraced Cosmonaut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2010, 03:28 PM
  #58
haveandare
Registered User
 
haveandare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 8,709
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
LOL, classic. Yup, its the players' fault...Erik Christensen needs to turn into a #1 center because thats where he's penciled in.

So, Sather's job is to just get guys on the team and then it's their job from there? Even though the majority of them are being asked to play far above their inherant talent level?

Just more pie in the sky ********* from people that have convinced themselves that a few mediocre to good prospects are going to rescue this team. The guy at the helm has had 10 years to fix this problem...and counting.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyBasedNYC View Post
Holy crap lol Its the players jobs now lol
Two things you can always count on here: People putting words in your mouth and people resorting to childish name-calling based on the words they put in your mouth.

I'm talking about the prospects. The article is about the prospects, the "young core," isn't it? Everyone says we're making Sather look good by praising him for getting these prospects and he doesn't deserve it. To me, they are all potentially great players and a GM is partially responsible for getting together a good prospect pool. No?

The young guys who aren't even in the league don't need to get better? Is that what you're saying?

haveandare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2010, 07:15 PM
  #59
chosen
Registered User
 
chosen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,008
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pizza View Post
I think Cheri would have been right there.
Maybe, but is that supposed to be an accomplishment of Sather's? He could have been a total bust, too.

So we'll say that the last elite forward drafted by the Rangers was Kovalev, and that Sather might have drafted one in a decade. How proud he must be. Toss in his last 10 or so drafts in Edmonton and it becomes comical or tragic.

chosen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2010, 07:19 PM
  #60
chosen
Registered User
 
chosen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,008
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupersonicMonkey View Post
Its just frustrating.

The OP was simply trying to convey an article he/she found, and people blow up with their conspiracy theories on how the evil Rangers propaganda machine are trying to spin their "overrated" prospect pool to their "ignorant" fan base.

Despite the fact that THN, TSN, and a few other credited and legit sources are high on these players, too? They must be on Dolan's payroll, too?

I guess I am, too? I didn't realize I was getting checks in the mail from MSG. I better file a complaint that someone stole my checks from my mail box.
Some of us do not care what Sather says, only what he does. If a shill article comes out extolling the rosy future in Rangersland, forgive some of us who have watched sheer incompetence for a solid decade.

If you want to scold the doubters, you're scolding those that have spent their hard-earned cash on a team that should have been doing a heckuva lot better than they have been. Save your scolding for perhaps the worst lengthy management in the history of the franchise.

chosen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2010, 09:35 PM
  #61
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,230
vCash: 500
I don't see what Kreider, Stepan, Grachev, and so on have to do with gafs made by management in the past.

These kids have been working their ass off their entire lives to get to this point.

They're solid players. And they're legit NHL prospects.

Well, whatever the case may be, these are good players that have a future. Their development and future have nothing to do with what happened in the past.

People want to live in the past, fine. That's their choice.

The fact remains, the Rangers have a good future ahead of them. Every team in the league makes their mistakes. The mistakes the Rangers have made are correctable through time. When these young players are ready for bigger roles the larger contracts will be coming off the books.

And that still has nothing to do with the young players. I fail to see how any of this is their fault?

And I'm not scolding anyone. If I have to be one of the only ones sticking up for the prospects, then so be it.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2010, 12:01 AM
  #62
Radek27
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 5,687
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Radek27
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
If the goal was/is a long run of success, working toward that goal should have started a decade ago.
Um isn't this all 30 NHL teams "goal"? Doesn't mean they have the right guy to get them there. He has had ten years to work on this goal and it's not really close. I don't see how he says that and then can turn around and explain why he gave Drury, Gomez, Redden, Rozsival, and company long term contract if that was indeed his "goal" from the start.

Radek27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2010, 12:17 AM
  #63
Radek27
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 5,687
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Radek27
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupersonicMonkey View Post
I don't see what Kreider, Stepan, Grachev, and so on have to do with gafs made by management in the past.

These kids have been working their ass off their entire lives to get to this point.

They're solid players. And they're legit NHL prospects.

Well, whatever the case may be, these are good players that have a future. Their development and future have nothing to do with what happened in the past.

People want to live in the past, fine. That's their choice.

The fact remains, the Rangers have a good future ahead of them. Every team in the league makes their mistakes. The mistakes the Rangers have made are correctable through time. When these young players are ready for bigger roles the larger contracts will be coming off the books.

And that still has nothing to do with the young players. I fail to see how any of this is their fault?

And I'm not scolding anyone. If I have to be one of the only ones sticking up for the prospects, then so be it.
Prospects bust, more often than not especially with this team. Your talking about these guys like they are Rangers already. If we have such great young players coming along why did we need to sign Frolov? Why resign Prospal? Why sign Kennedy? Like I already said, Sather says one thing but if you look at the way the team is made up the two don't really match.

No one is living in the past, we are living in the present in which we were an inept offensive team, the coach said he would sit players if there was anyone else worth dressing, our cap is stuffed with overpaid garbage, and we are coming off missing the playoffs. Add in even if NJ doesn't get Kovalchuk every team in our division got better this offseason and the Isles should be better. But the plan is to build a core of young players that will win for a long time don't ya know? Sheesh

That is every teams goal people, the thing is you don't get there by picking busts like Hugh Jessiman, Al Montoya, Lauri Korpikoski, Bobby Sanguinetti, ect. Even some of the guys who looked liek they would be something were just flash in the pan, Prucha, Dawes, Immonen. You sure don't get there by giving fading star players long term contracts that let them retire very rich people all during that time killing your cap space so that when a true star player who deserves that money comes a long (kovalchuk) your hands are tied because you have overpaid untradable players.

We know the friggin plan how about you execute it in the right way Slats.

Radek27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2010, 12:25 AM
  #64
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 SupersonicMonkey View Post
I don't see what Kreider, Stepan, Grachev, and so on have to do with gafs made by management in the past.

These kids have been working their ass off their entire lives to get to this point.

They're solid players. And they're legit NHL prospects.

Well, whatever the case may be, these are good players that have a future. Their development and future have nothing to do with what happened in the past.

People want to live in the past, fine. That's their choice.

The fact remains, the Rangers have a good future ahead of them. Every team in the league makes their mistakes. The mistakes the Rangers have made are correctable through time. When these young players are ready for bigger roles the larger contracts will be coming off the books.

And that still has nothing to do with the young players. I fail to see how any of this is their fault?

And I'm not scolding anyone. If I have to be one of the only ones sticking up for the prospects, then so be it.
Why does anyone have to stick up for the prospects? No one is putting them down. People are just trying to temper expectations for them with some logic, unlike the team, which tries to feed us this "do not be alarmed-all is well" propaganda. Saying that the Rangers don't have elite prospects isn't meant to be a put down to the prospects we do have. It's just stating what is. Stepan, Grachev, Kreider, etc. are good players. But are they the ilk of Toews, Kane, Kopitar, Richards, Carter, Backstrom, Parise, Tavares, etc?

The Rangers would certainly like you to believe so, but that doesn't mean it's the case.

NYR Sting is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2010, 12:46 AM
  #65
Pizza
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,588
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chosen View Post
Maybe, but is that supposed to be an accomplishment of Sather's? He could have been a total bust, too.

So we'll say that the last elite forward drafted by the Rangers was Kovalev, and that Sather might have drafted one in a decade. How proud he must be. Toss in his last 10 or so drafts in Edmonton and it becomes comical or tragic.
I'm simply stating that Cherepanov had a strong chance to be an elite NHL forward.

To this point for all practical purposes Sather has accomplished practically nothing.

One decent playoff run in ten years. Hardly inspiring.

My sense is that if his legacy were to be salvaged it will rely heavily on the young players he's so far had the good sense to hang onto.

Pizza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2010, 06:34 AM
  #66
msv957
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,057
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by offdacrossbar View Post
this article is hillarious. every gm says the same things about their players. in fact, this article could have been written a few years ago with names like cally, dubi, korpikoski, prucha, immonen, dawes, hossa, tyutin, girardi, staal, sauer, pock, potter, lampman, liffiton, zaba and vally. look how many of them worked out.

i'll say again what ive said before, we have a decent group of players in the pipeline but we still lack a real true #1 dman or #1 forward.

they're just not there.
Good post.. I agree... Don't forget about Montoya who did not work out...

Every GM has to put out the impression that they are "excited about the future with the prospects they have in the system".....

It is almost impossible to predict who will develop at the NHL level and who will not... However, Sather is building nicely behind the barn with quite a few prospects in the system right now so even if half do not work out there would still be enough NHL talent to make the NHL roster a few years down the line.

I consider Gaborik the #1 forward now and into the future.. He is 28 years old.

also... Staal could be considered a #1 defenseman.. He is what 23/24 yrs old?

msv957 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2010, 08:03 AM
  #67
GAGLine
HFBoards Sponsor
 
GAGLine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,058
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupersonicMonkey View Post
I don't see what Kreider, Stepan, Grachev, and so on have to do with gafs made by management in the past.

These kids have been working their ass off their entire lives to get to this point.

They're solid players. And they're legit NHL prospects.

Well, whatever the case may be, these are good players that have a future. Their development and future have nothing to do with what happened in the past.

People want to live in the past, fine. That's their choice.

The fact remains, the Rangers have a good future ahead of them. Every team in the league makes their mistakes. The mistakes the Rangers have made are correctable through time. When these young players are ready for bigger roles the larger contracts will be coming off the books.

And that still has nothing to do with the young players. I fail to see how any of this is their fault?

And I'm not scolding anyone. If I have to be one of the only ones sticking up for the prospects, then so be it.
I don't think anyone is saying anything negative about our prospects. Some believe they will be very good players, others take a wait an see approach. And for the record, Stepan, Grachev and Kreider were ranked 16th, 21st and 22nd in THN's future watch. So apparently NHL scouts around the league think pretty highly of those 3 players.

I think what bothers some people though is that the Rangers are acting like it's been their plan all along to go with youth, and some fans are eating it up. They fail to read between the lines. Sather has no choice but to go with a youth movement because he has no cap space. Anyone thinking that he has magically changed his ways are going to be sadly disappointed if he's still around when we finally have some money to spend.

GAGLine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2010, 08:41 AM
  #68
BlueshirtBlitz
Rich Nash
 
BlueshirtBlitz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New York
Posts: 19,584
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAGLine View Post
I don't think anyone is saying anything negative about our prospects. Some believe they will be very good players, others take a wait an see approach. And for the record, Stepan, Grachev and Kreider were ranked 16th, 21st and 22nd in THN's future watch. So apparently NHL scouts around the league think pretty highly of those 3 players.

I think what bothers some people though is that the Rangers are acting like it's been their plan all along to go with youth, and some fans are eating it up. They fail to read between the lines. Sather has no choice but to go with a youth movement because he has no cap space. Anyone thinking that he has magically changed his ways are going to be sadly disappointed if he's still around when we finally have some money to spend.
I don't think anybody is lauding Sather as the messiah of our youth movement, but the fact is in a decade when our organization has been so grim some fans finally are able to see what can possibly be the way out in these prospects. Like you said, Kreider Stepan and Grachev are very good- enough to be essential to a cup team? We can't say yet. But as prospects, they are very promising and many of us are ecstatic for that.

BlueshirtBlitz is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2010, 08:46 AM
  #69
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 16,302
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haveandare View Post
Two things you can always count on here: People putting words in your mouth and people resorting to childish name-calling based on the words they put in your mouth.

I'm talking about the prospects. The article is about the prospects, the "young core," isn't it? Everyone says we're making Sather look good by praising him for getting these prospects and he doesn't deserve it. To me, they are all potentially great players and a GM is partially responsible for getting together a good prospect pool. No?

The young guys who aren't even in the league don't need to get better? Is that what you're saying?
Im not putting words in your mouth, but I certainly am speculating. So, you've chosen to ignore virtually all of the last 10 years, which consisted of mostly bad hockey AND the cluster**** that is the current roster in order to credit Sather for a few good, but non-elite level prospects? Is that what you're saying???

Because no, Im not saying the prospects dont need to get better. I hope they do, and I hope they have long NHL careers. What I am saying is that ignoring a 10 year track record of largely bad decisions, and then praising the GM for cobbling together a deep, yet largely unspectacular prospect pool given the state of the current NHL club is just asking for trouble.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2010, 09:22 AM
  #70
007
You 'Orns!
 
007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Mannahatta
Country: Finland
Posts: 3,490
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to 007 Send a message via MSN to 007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trxjw View Post
Bingo. This is nothing more than the organization trying to spin the current cap situation in a positive light. They're not looking towards the future by choice; They've simply forced themselves into that position by handing out horrible contracts.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of many of our prospects (*cough* <---), but saying "We've always looked towards the future" after all this time is nothing more than a load of BS.
It's funny: when he was in Edmonton, Sather did a good job with limited funds. He came to the Rangers, lost all discipline and was one of the worst GM's in the league (he behaved just as Neil Smith did post-1994).

Then came the Cap era, and I'd say he hasn't done a bad job, overall. Some of the contracts have been horrible, he's still trying to hit a home-run in a bizarre way (Redden, Gomez, even Drury - whom I like as a player and a Ranger, but is overpaid). You have to give him credit, though, Gaborik is a great signing, Jagr and Straka worked well for the Rangers, he's has been stocking the cupboard in the last few years quite well.

Lesson? Slats only works well when he is handcuffed in some way.

007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2010, 11:49 AM
  #71
OldStanley
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 103
vCash: 500
I truly think the Ranger's organizational goal is to make money by providing entertainment. It's a business first and foremost. If they win or lose this team makes money as long as they can market the team successfully. In Manhattan that is not all that difficult. The most famous arena in the world filled with some of the biggest name and or most unique players in the league creates interest in the team, which in turn is used to create revenue through the marketing to sponsors, corporations and fans.

OldStanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2010, 12:07 PM
  #72
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 007 View Post
It's funny: when he was in Edmonton, Sather did a good job with limited funds. He came to the Rangers, lost all discipline and was one of the worst GM's in the league (he behaved just as Neil Smith did post-1994).

Then came the Cap era, and I'd say he hasn't done a bad job, overall. Some of the contracts have been horrible, he's still trying to hit a home-run in a bizarre way (Redden, Gomez, even Drury - whom I like as a player and a Ranger, but is overpaid). You have to give him credit, though, Gaborik is a great signing, Jagr and Straka worked well for the Rangers, he's has been stocking the cupboard in the last few years quite well.

Lesson? Slats only works well when he is handcuffed in some way.
Yeah, boy he did a great job with limited funds. Check out how great he did in the draft from 1983-2000, when he left for the Rangers. A pathetic lot. My view is that the seventeen years of futility were a bigger indicator of Sather as a GM than the two drafts in which he drafted most of the heart of the championship Oilers. All except the biggest piece, that is, since Gretzky wasn't drafted by the Oil at all.

Then he went to the Rangers where, as you said, he became one of the worst GMs in the league. Then, ONLY because he was the GM of the RANGERS, he was able to get Jaromir Jagr for absolutely nothing, ensuring that the awful, badly in need of a rebuilding effort Rangers, could have 3 largely meaningless playoff runs that couldn't have possibly resulted in much success (and they didn't), because outside of Jagr and Lundqvist, the team was largely a bunch of scrubs. Yes, Jagr and Straka worked well to waste three seasons that could have been dedicated to actually, you know, building a contending team.

Lesson? "Slats" only works well when he is handed Wayne Gretzky or Jaromir Jagr (if you can call that "well") on a silver platter.

NYR Sting is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2010, 12:18 PM
  #73
Disgraced Cosmonaut
Registered User
 
Disgraced Cosmonaut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,531
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sting36e View Post
Yeah, boy he did a great job with limited funds. Check out how great he did in the draft from 1983-2000, when he left for the Rangers. A pathetic lot. My view is that the seventeen years of futility were a bigger indicator of Sather as a GM than the two drafts in which he drafted most of the heart of the championship Oilers. All except the biggest piece, that is, since Gretzky wasn't drafted by the Oil at all.

Then he went to the Rangers where, as you said, he became one of the worst GMs in the league. Then, ONLY because he was the GM of the RANGERS, he was able to get Jaromir Jagr for absolutely nothing, ensuring that the awful, badly in need of a rebuilding effort Rangers, could have 3 largely meaningless playoff runs that couldn't have possibly resulted in much success (and they didn't), because outside of Jagr and Lundqvist, the team was largely a bunch of scrubs. Yes, Jagr and Straka worked well to waste three seasons that could have been dedicated to actually, you know, building a contending team.

Lesson? "Slats" only works well when he is handed Wayne Gretzky or Jaromir Jagr (if you can call that "well") on a silver platter.
while i think Sather is in the bottom 5 GMs in the league- unquestionably- to say that he "only works well...." is not quite right. messier's oilers won w/o gretzky. that's got to be worth something.
still, in 30 years or so of being a gm, he rarely sustained any amount of success absent those two players.
if JD ran the team, I think people would be happier- and that's not saying all that much yet.

Disgraced Cosmonaut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2010, 06:27 PM
  #74
chosen
Registered User
 
chosen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,008
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 007 View Post
It's funny: when he was in Edmonton, Sather did a good job with limited funds. He came to the Rangers, lost all discipline and was one of the worst GM's in the league (he behaved just as Neil Smith did post-1994).

Then came the Cap era, and I'd say he hasn't done a bad job, overall. Some of the contracts have been horrible, he's still trying to hit a home-run in a bizarre way (Redden, Gomez, even Drury - whom I like as a player and a Ranger, but is overpaid). You have to give him credit, though, Gaborik is a great signing, Jagr and Straka worked well for the Rangers, he's has been stocking the cupboard in the last few years quite well.

Lesson? Slats only works well when he is handcuffed in some way.
The myth of the genius of Sather in Edmonton will never die, no matter how wrong it is.

chosen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2010, 10:27 PM
  #75
mike14
Registered User
 
mike14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Melbourne
Country: Australia
Posts: 4,730
vCash: 500
For those interested here are some #s since Sather took over:

-16 teams have made the PO more than NYR, 8 teams less,
- 19 teams have been to the Conf Finals
- 12 teams have been to the SCF
- 8 teams have won the cup

Since the lockout:
- 3 teams have made the PO more than NYR, 19 teams less
- 10 teams have made the Conf Final
- 8 teams have made the SCF
- 5 teams have won the cup

mike14 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 04:40 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.