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

Rangers are without a plan coming into the draft

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-22-2011, 11:11 AM
  #126
Fleury4ever
Registered User
 
Fleury4ever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 1,028
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by New York RKY View Post
HF predicts the Rangers to grab Biggs at the 15th spot.

Don't really know how happy I am with that.
That would be awesome. Not that I know much about all the prospects, but he seems like he might actually move up since he seems to stand out physically.

Fleury4ever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2011, 11:13 AM
  #127
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 16,549
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DatsyukSOGoal View Post
If you have solid prospects like the Rangers do, you could always trade them for established elite talent.
Right, because so many teams are lining up to trade their established elite talents for a package of good players. Thats a winning move in today's NHL.

Im just trying to pinpoint the hyprocrisy here because its all over the place. First, Gordie Clark is doing an "excellent" job drafting given his slots. Fine, I think "excellent" is an extremely strong word, but whatever.

That brings me to the thing that really makes me scratch my head....the amount of people screaming about "staying the course." Well, "staying the course" involves continuing to draft OK players in the mid first round, continuing to miss out on impact players, and continuing to scratch and claw for playoff spots in the midst of mediocrity.

Not to mention that plenty of other teams have plucked these impact players outside of the top 10, but thats a different argument for a different day.

Bleed Ranger Blue is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2011, 11:14 AM
  #128
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 21,703
vCash: 500
People really need to remember that Lucic's development is not something that normally happens at all, AND he was a second round pick.

Banking on player with low offensive upside to turn out like Lucic is foolhardy if you're using a high pick on that player.

If the Rangers take Biggs then I'm pretty sure they're thinking he would fill a niche down the road on the 3rd line or so, maybe with the very very small hope that he magically develops like Lucic.

Levitate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2011, 11:22 AM
  #129
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 9,893
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eco's bones View Post
I have the same impression as well. That Torts would love to have this kid on his team. Even if he lacks a little in the skill department compared to some of the others who might be around Biggs sounds like a player who will go through a wall for his team.

There's another dimension as well--at least a major reason for drafting McIlrath last year was the 'physical' aspect of his game. The idea that you have a guy who can take a regular shift and who is miserable to play against. We sometimes talk here about the need to replace no-talent fighters with guys who can handle themselves, protect teammates and earn their share of ice time. If Biggs can turn out anywhere close to Lucic--then he'll be a very good pick.
I happen to like Biggs but I have my doubts as to Torts being his coach if the Ranges take him.

Biggs would most likely be 3 or 4 years away from being a full time NHL player if EVERYTHING break right. Is Torts going to be his coach? Not likely considering that would be a very long tenure in today's NHL.

I think your logic about the pick is correct though. Biggs (to me) is going to be a good player.

The guy I hope falls to the Rangers is Joel Armia. I will admit though that this draft is the 1st in my life I haven't followed as much as I'd like. I just hope the Rangers DO have a plan and Clarke is just feeding a reporter BS.

Friday night should be interesting..

Son of Steinbrenner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2011, 11:24 AM
  #130
eco's bones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Elmira NY
Country: United States
Posts: 14,272
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabid Ranger View Post
The question with Biggs is offensive upside. You know that he'll hit, fight, stand up for his teammates, be a rah-rah guy in the room etc. What you don't know if his hands will ever catch up to the rest of what he brings to the table. My take is he's not a razzle dazzle kind of player, but has a good shot and a nose for the game. He's not a scrub. With some development and PP time, he could be a 25 goal scorer at the NHL level. If you know that you'll get that year in and year out for a decade, why wouldn't you take him in the first round?
I think a lot have the mindset that we have to hit a home run every time we make a first round pick--a home run being a legit 1st line or 1st pairing d-man. This draft--after the first 9 guys--seems to me to be a guessing game--whether it's shorter on talent compared to other drafts or not. Regardless, Biggs seems like a safe pick. Someone who will play. Maybe somewhere between a Callahan and a Prust only bigger than both. Even if his hands don't come around he should be a solid 3rd liner with excellent intangibles.

The Rangers are putting pieces together--and Biggs would be a good fit. OTOH--a McNeill, Miller or Schiefele would be good fits too.

eco's bones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2011, 11:28 AM
  #131
eco's bones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Elmira NY
Country: United States
Posts: 14,272
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Steinbrenner View Post
I happen to like Biggs but I have my doubts as to Torts being his coach if the Ranges take him.

Biggs would most likely be 3 or 4 years away from being a full time NHL player if EVERYTHING break right. Is Torts going to be his coach? Not likely considering that would be a very long tenure in today's NHL.

I think your logic about the pick is correct though. Biggs (to me) is going to be a good player.

The guy I hope falls to the Rangers is Joel Armia. I will admit though that this draft is the 1st in my life I haven't followed as much as I'd like. I just hope the Rangers DO have a plan and Clarke is just feeding a reporter BS.

Friday night should be interesting..
That is a good point. I think there's some chance that Biggs could be here after 2 years but the 3-4 seems more likely and coaching changes are a frequent NHL even NYRangers occurence.

On Armia I really think he'll go somewhere 10-12--if he's on board though I think I'd take him over McNeill, Biggs, Miller, Schiefele--and other forwards we've been talking about.

eco's bones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2011, 11:32 AM
  #132
NYR Viper
Moderator
 
NYR Viper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 30,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Steinbrenner View Post
I happen to like Biggs but I have my doubts as to Torts being his coach if the Ranges take him.

Biggs would most likely be 3 or 4 years away from being a full time NHL player if EVERYTHING break right. Is Torts going to be his coach? Not likely considering that would be a very long tenure in today's NHL.

I think your logic about the pick is correct though. Biggs (to me) is going to be a good player.

The guy I hope falls to the Rangers is Joel Armia. I will admit though that this draft is the 1st in my life I haven't followed as much as I'd like. I just hope the Rangers DO have a plan and Clarke is just feeding a reporter BS.

Friday night should be interesting..
SOS! Welcome back! I knew you would show up again around draft time!

NYR Viper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2011, 11:35 AM
  #133
Rabid Ranger
2 is better than one
 
Rabid Ranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Murica
Country: United States
Posts: 20,352
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Steinbrenner View Post
I happen to like Biggs but I have my doubts as to Torts being his coach if the Ranges take him.

Biggs would most likely be 3 or 4 years away from being a full time NHL player if EVERYTHING break right. Is Torts going to be his coach? Not likely considering that would be a very long tenure in today's NHL.

I think your logic about the pick is correct though. Biggs (to me) is going to be a good player.

The guy I hope falls to the Rangers is Joel Armia. I will admit though that this draft is the 1st in my life I haven't followed as much as I'd like. I just hope the Rangers DO have a plan and Clarke is just feeding a reporter BS.

Friday night should be interesting..
I don't think it's going to take that long for Biggs to make the bigs, but your point about Torts' status is valid. Personally, I'd rather see the Rangers take a chance on a guy like Grimaldi at 15 instead of the "safer" pick (whoever that might be), but I'm not sure that's in the cards.

Rabid Ranger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2011, 11:47 AM
  #134
Orr Nightmare
Registered User
 
Orr Nightmare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Right, because so many teams are lining up to trade their established elite talents for a package of good players. Thats a winning move in today's NHL.

Im just trying to pinpoint the hyprocrisy here because its all over the place. First, Gordie Clark is doing an "excellent" job drafting given his slots. Fine, I think "excellent" is an extremely strong word, but whatever.

That brings me to the thing that really makes me scratch my head....the amount of people screaming about "staying the course." Well, "staying the course" involves continuing to draft OK players in the mid first round, continuing to miss out on impact players, and continuing to scratch and claw for playoff spots in the midst of mediocrity.

Not to mention that plenty of other teams have plucked these impact players outside of the top 10, but thats a different argument for a different day.
Lucis was diagnosed with Scheuermann's disease when he was 15 and that scared a lot of teams of selecting him sooner.

Orr Nightmare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2011, 11:51 AM
  #135
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 21,703
vCash: 500
Well, also that his stats were not very good at all

Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Steinbrenner View Post
I just hope the Rangers DO have a plan and Clarke is just feeding a reporter BS.

Friday night should be interesting..
They certainly do have a plan, they just don't have a specific player they're targeting like they were with McIlrath. They definitely have a list of players in order of preference and have an idea of at what point they'd rather trade up/down/stay and pick, etc.

Levitate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2011, 12:16 PM
  #136
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 9,893
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Levitate View Post
Well, also that his stats were not very good at all



They certainly do have a plan, they just don't have a specific player they're targeting like they were with McIlrath. They definitely have a list of players in order of preference and have an idea of at what point they'd rather trade up/down/stay and pick, etc.
Wow so you are telling me the Rangers have a draft board.

I understand what you are saying I just wish the Rangers were targeting somebody. I wouldn't even go crazy if it was a defenseman. Even in a weak draft you can still find a top line player. I wish Clarke said "With our scouting department we think we can find a few good NHL players"

I like Clarke, he's done a good job but I'd rather he was more certain of what the team was going to do days before the draft. Maybe, that's just me...

Son of Steinbrenner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2011, 12:20 PM
  #137
JimmyStart*
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,569
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Right, because so many teams are lining up to trade their established elite talents for a package of good players. Thats a winning move in today's NHL.

Im just trying to pinpoint the hyprocrisy here because its all over the place. First, Gordie Clark is doing an "excellent" job drafting given his slots. Fine, I think "excellent" is an extremely strong word, but whatever.

That brings me to the thing that really makes me scratch my head....the amount of people screaming about "staying the course." Well, "staying the course" involves continuing to draft OK players in the mid first round, continuing to miss out on impact players, and continuing to scratch and claw for playoff spots in the midst of mediocrity.

Not to mention that plenty of other teams have plucked these impact players outside of the top 10, but thats a different argument for a different day.
Define "OK" and could you actually explain yourself instead of throwing out random nonsensical ideas that have no backing just to prove that you're a rebel who doesn't give Clark the credit he's due? You could say it's too early to label Clark a franchise savior but if you're paying any attention whatsoever to the prospects we've gotten, how they've been developing and what they've done for us it's just uninformed claiming anything other than Clark has done excellent. Your criteria for what is an excellent job or not makes no sense. Staal, Anisimov, Stepan, MDZ, etc aren't impact guys this early in their careers/after being drafted? Guys we scouted and later traded for aren't impact guys? There is more than just the draft when it comes to scouting you know and since you've failed to mention that it seems like you're not thinking with all the information which would explain a lot.

And if it's just too early to tell (Which btw it is) then again you may be hesitant to say it's an excellent job until we see another 3 years from now who panned out but then that means you don't go around pretending you alone are able to hand out the correct draft grades to teams and that everyone else is wrong.

JimmyStart* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2011, 12:30 PM
  #138
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 11,095
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haohmaru View Post
And, for the umpteenth time, it's completely foolish to believe that a team competing for a playoff spot every year until the last day of the season are going to be sellers at the deadline. In the fantasy land where you live, maybe the 2-3 home games that generate ~2 million revenue/per game is something you flippantly throw away on getting a higher draft pick. In the real world, that doesn't happen - especially a big market like this one.

I don't entirely disagree with your idea, but it's not going to happen. Could you imagine Toronto being tied for a playoff spot and selling at the trade deadline? Those fans would burn the city to the ground.
Bull-effing-****. That's SATHER's mentality. Period.

Don't give me this line about the revenues from the gate - that's much more important to SMALL market teams who are operating much closer to breakeven. This is an organization that routinely - ROUTINELY, mind you - throws $3MM into NBA trades. (Watch tomorrow night and you'll see them do it again.) The hockey team alone had a team salary of $90-odd MM ten years ago when ticket prices and TV revenue were a fraction of what they are now. If this were truly about the dollars, the Rangers are one of the few organizations that could afford a few million shortfall in a well-planned move to position it for millions upon millions more on an annual basis that would be earned by having a perennial Cup-winning team.

Furthermore, comparing the Rangers to Toronto* is ludicrous. While I understand that there are plenty of fans that would be annoyed as they share the asinine "you can always win - all you need is to get in!" perspective (despite the fact that history has consistently demonstrated it to be false) that could cause such a riot in Toronto, those fans are a small minority in this city. The Rangers rank behind the Yankees, Mets, Giants, Jets and Knicks in this town. Would there be a couple of annoyed fans? Sure. Would it amount to anything? No. There certainly would be no riot. (After all, was there a riot in '04?)

This is all about Sather's well documented "lion" mentality - that's it.





*Furthermore, I believe that even in Toronto, you could "sell" selling at the trade deadline to the fans, if the team was on the precipice and not looking good - you just couldn't do it every year.

BrooklynRangersFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2011, 12:38 PM
  #139
007
You 'Orns!
 
007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Mannahatta
Country: Finland
Posts: 3,492
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to 007 Send a message via MSN to 007
Quote:
Originally Posted by nafsregnar21 View Post
This is an okay draft but I hope to god they draft Grimaldi or Nieto. TSN has the Rangers drafting Armia, no thanks korpikoski v2.0 in my eyes.
Yeah, who'd want a 20g/40pt guy with a solid defensive game at pick 15 in a weak draft..? Besides, their scouting reports are very different from each other. The only thing that links them is blond hair and the army, in my opinion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by donpaulo View Post
Armia is an intriguing player. I think NY could do worse. My main concern with him is his English but the skill is clearly there.
I wouldn't worry about his English -- he speaks English about as well as any Finnish kid his age and the mistakes he makes are pretty standard for any Finn. I'm sure he understands fine, it just doesn't necessarily sound like it when you hear him speak.

I like Armia, in that (if he makes the big show) he projects as a goal scorer. I think it's unlikely, if not impossible, that he falls to 15.

007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2011, 12:48 PM
  #140
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,230
vCash: 500
There is a philosophy widely accepted by professional scouts.

Players take on average of 5 years from the draft until they develop to a point where they can crack the NHL lineup and start contributing on a regular basis.

2000 + 5 = 2005

Lundqvist

2004 + 5 = 2009

Dubinsky, Callahan

2005 + 5 = 2010

Staal, Sauer

2006 + 5 = 2011

Anisimov

2007 + 5 = 2012

McDonagh

2008 + 5 = 2013

Del Zotto, Stepan, Grachev

2009 + 5 = 2014

Kreider, Erixon

2010 + 5 = 2015

McIlrath, Thomas

Girardi is undrafted.



Most of them are on the curve, some of them are ahead of it.

The Rangers were not good at and didn't rely on drafting in the mid-90's to the early-2000's.

Every decade before that they were very good. And before that when there was no draft, they were equally as good at finding talent.

Let's play: let's research how many times from 1926 through the 1990's the Rangers got to either the Cup Finals, Conference Final, or were league champions/runners up.

You would be surprised at how often. The 4 Cups are deceiving and do not reflect the success this club has had though its history.

They have drafted well since 2004. Those players are STARTING to make an impact.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2011, 12:51 PM
  #141
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,230
vCash: 500
Also, "the Rangers don't have a plan going into the draft" is bull **** spun by detractors.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2011, 12:52 PM
  #142
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 21,703
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Steinbrenner View Post
Wow so you are telling me the Rangers have a draft board.

I understand what you are saying I just wish the Rangers were targeting somebody. I wouldn't even go crazy if it was a defenseman. Even in a weak draft you can still find a top line player. I wish Clarke said "With our scouting department we think we can find a few good NHL players"

I like Clarke, he's done a good job but I'd rather he was more certain of what the team was going to do days before the draft. Maybe, that's just me...
Well, having a draft board and opinions about the players IS having a plan. Really specifically keying in one player like they did last year is pretty unusual it seems, when you're drafting out of the top 10 or so.

Levitate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2011, 12:56 PM
  #143
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 9,893
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupersonicMonkey View Post
There is a philosophy widely accepted by professional scouts.

Players take on average of 5 years from the draft until they develop to a point where they can crack the NHL lineup and start contributing on a regular basis.

2000 + 5 = 2005

Lundqvist

2004 + 5 = 2009

Dubinsky, Callahan

2005 + 5 = 2010

Staal, Sauer

2006 + 5 = 2011

Anisimov

2007 + 5 = 2012

McDonagh

2008 + 5 = 2013

Del Zotto, Stepan, Grachev

2009 + 5 = 2014

Kreider, Erixon

2010 + 5 = 2015

McIlrath, Thomas

Girardi is undrafted.



Most of them are on the curve, some of them are ahead of it.

The Rangers were not good at and didn't rely on drafting in the mid-90's to the early-2000's.

Every decade before that they were very good. And before that when there was no draft, they were equally as good at finding talent.

Let's play: let's research how many times from 1926 through the 1990's the Rangers got to either the Cup Finals, Conference Final, or were league champions/runners up.

You would be surprised at how often. The 4 Cups are deceiving and do not reflect the success this club has had though its history.

They have drafted well since 2004. Those players are STARTING to make an impact.

No really they aren't. You make excellant points until you say the 4 cups are deceiving. Look, I'm not going to go back the entire history of this team but they have reached the "Conference finals" 3 times in 31 seasons. This isn't a team that has been a Stanley Cup contender that has run into tough luck, bad calls, etc. We can go back and fourth on seasons they COULD'VE done more 1986,1992, 1997, 2007to a lesser extent.

I don't see a point going back to 1926, not one player or person from those years has any impact on what's gone on here the past 35 years.

4 Cups are exactly what this team has EARNED in it's history.

Son of Steinbrenner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2011, 12:59 PM
  #144
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 9,893
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Levitate View Post
Well, having a draft board and opinions about the players IS having a plan. Really specifically keying in one player like they did last year is pretty unusual it seems, when you're drafting out of the top 10 or so.
I guess I agree. I don't know though. I would think that in this draft (again I haven't followed it as much as I'd like) teams boards are all over the map. My hope is somebody the Rangers have high on their draft board falls to them at 15.

I really seem to wonder if Grimaldi is the guy they are targeting. The Rangers aren't scared off by smaller forwards and he has a world of talent. This is going to be one really interesting 1st round.

Son of Steinbrenner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2011, 01:02 PM
  #145
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 21,703
vCash: 500
Leslie said Grimaldi didn't seem to be a target, but then again, last year she said there was no chance they'd take McIlrath

I get the impression that they feel like the guys they really like will probably be gone by 15, and after that, there are a bunch of guys about on the same level that they're looking at and will take whichever one is available at that point

edit: I am really interested to see if there's a faller or two though...again I wouldn't mind the Rangers taking a talented defenseman that falls if the remaining forwards don't include any standouts

Levitate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2011, 01:10 PM
  #146
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 9,893
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Levitate View Post
Leslie said Grimaldi didn't seem to be a target, but then again, last year she said there was no chance they'd take McIlrath

I get the impression that they feel like the guys they really like will probably be gone by 15, and after that, there are a bunch of guys about on the same level that they're looking at and will take whichever one is available at that point

edit: I am really interested to see if there's a faller or two though...again I wouldn't mind the Rangers taking a talented defenseman that falls if the remaining forwards don't include any standouts
I wouldn't mind a defenseman although I get the impression this board would be on a collective suicide watch if that the direction the Rangers go.


Leslie does a great job but I just have a funny feeling that's the player the Rangers will end up drafting. We can sit here with a list of undersized fowards the Rangers have taken the past few years.

One thing concerning Grimaldi is the new headshot rule. I think a small player like Grimaldi entering the league a few seasons after a rule like that has been in place gives him a tad more value.

Son of Steinbrenner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2011, 01:25 PM
  #147
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 21,703
vCash: 500
eh, if it was someone like Murphy that fell and is obviously the most talented guy available, I'd be OK. If it was Oleksiak or something then pass

Levitate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2011, 01:34 PM
  #148
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,230
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Steinbrenner View Post
No really they aren't. You make excellant points until you say the 4 cups are deceiving. Look, I'm not going to go back the entire history of this team but they have reached the "Conference finals" 3 times in 31 seasons. This isn't a team that has been a Stanley Cup contender that has run into tough luck, bad calls, etc. We can go back and fourth on seasons they COULD'VE done more 1986,1992, 1997, 2007to a lesser extent.

I don't see a point going back to 1926, not one player or person from those years has any impact on what's gone on here the past 35 years.

4 Cups are exactly what this team has EARNED in it's history.
28, 29, 32, 33, 37, 40, 50, 72, 79, 94

Stanley Cup appearances.

Ill dig deeper when I have the time to find league championships (1st overall), conference final appearances, and runners up in regular seasons.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2011, 01:37 PM
  #149
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 9,893
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Levitate View Post
eh, if it was someone like Murphy that fell and is obviously the most talented guy available, I'd be OK. If it was Oleksiak or something then pass
Oleksiak from what I read is to much of a project for my taste.

You know, I can make a case that the Rangers take Oleksiak because he would have the time to develop. I don't want them to take that route but I can see them using that logic. I think I saw them use that logic last year!


I think I'd be fine with Armia, Grimaldi, and Biggs...in that order. Obviously that's based on somebody not dropping dramatically.

Son of Steinbrenner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-22-2011, 01:37 PM
  #150
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,230
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Steinbrenner View Post
No really they aren't. You make excellant points until you say the 4 cups are deceiving. Look, I'm not going to go back the entire history of this team but they have reached the "Conference finals" 3 times in 31 seasons. This isn't a team that has been a Stanley Cup contender that has run into tough luck, bad calls, etc. We can go back and fourth on seasons they COULD'VE done more 1986,1992, 1997, 2007to a lesser extent.

I don't see a point going back to 1926, not one player or person from those years has any impact on what's gone on here the past 35 years.

4 Cups are exactly what this team has EARNED in it's history.
Also, if people aren't going to recognize the whole, and only a portion in later history, then im going to as well and say I don't care about the late 90's early 2000's. I only care about 2004+ and the future.

SupersonicMonkey* 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.