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

Messier: Pros and Cons

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-23-2004, 10:07 PM
  #76
Graveytrain
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 204
vCash: 500
Messier can do all those things from behind the bench....But in the end, his selfishness will rule the day, as always

We said goodbye and paid him his due respect, enough already....If this Orginization can't find someone else to teach a few kids to keep their head up when the Media starts barking then we're in worse shape then we think....

What's next, he's going to tuck Murray in before nap time? Tie his skates?

Graveytrain is offline  
Old
07-23-2004, 10:52 PM
  #77
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
On one hand you say he has no input in the front office hand and now your saying his move on Nielsen was the right call and he does have control of
head coaches. It's one or the other.
Actually it's not one or the other. First off a dispute between a player and a coach has happened a thousand times, that doesn't mean the player has input to the front office which includes, trades, signings, callups, etc. BIG difference.

Secondly even on top of all that you're talking about an 11 year difference and two different owners, gm's and situations.

Thirdly the argument that he "sway" in the front office doesnt even make sense because otherwise with the so called problems you claim he has with Renney, Renney would not be such an intrigal part of this organization and certainly wouldn't have been on the coaching staff.

Quote:
Ron Low actually did finish over five hundred under Sather in Edmonton. Bryan Trottier has seven stanley cup rings (more than Messier) and was highly endorsed by Joe Sakic and Forsberg.
Ron Low finished over .500 in edmonton?

1994-95 Edmonton Oilers NHL Head Coach‡ 13 5 7 1 0 0.423 Out of Playoffs
1995-96 Edmonton Oilers NHL Head Coach 82 30 44 8 0 0.415 Out of Playoffs
1996-97 Edmonton Oilers NHL Head Coach 82 36 37 9 0 0.494 Lost in round 2
1997-98 Edmonton Oilers NHL Head Coach 82 35 37 10 0 0.488 Lost in round 2
1998-99 Edmonton Oilers NHL Head Coach 82 33 37 12 0 0.476 Lost in round 1

You wanna try that one again from the top?

As for Trottier the ONLY head coaching experience he had was in Portland which was.....a disaster to say the least. Suffice to say his second head coaching experience with the Rangers, was even worse. Sorry but in this case there is actual evidence to support that claim.


Quote:
I seem to recall Schoenfeld was loyal to Trottier and would not take his job, while the only person Messier could ever work for (aside from Keenan) had to come downstairs and was clearly overmatched at coaching, look at the team Trottier had vs Sather.
You seem to recall wrong then, because even recently there was talk about the contention between the two and how Schoenfeld was often the one who seemed to be running the bench.

Seeing as you never believe a dang thing i say, here is one link from a week ago that touches on the problems.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/ho...p-182778c.html

If you want more you'll have to find those yourself.

Schoenfeld didn't take the job because {As most people who are fans of them and regulars here would testify} he most likely did not want to be the lame duck coach for a team that was too dysfunctional to make the playoffs.

As for Messier he seemed to play just fine for someone he supposedly hated {Renney} so again I dunno exactly where the comments are coming from.

Quote:
Are we talking about Renny and Messier in Vancouver or what amounted to an extended exhibition schedule for the Rangers at the end of the this year after Sather went upstairs.
Please, Renney was the one running all the systems and practices for this team. Renney was essentially the coach for the entire term. Again you can ask anyone on these boards about that {whether they agree with me about messier or not}.

So that's like 3 for 3 on things that simply weren't true.

Quote:
But he was not on the moon he was avg 18-19 minutes a game against those coaches public wishes as to what they felt was best for the team. Totals that actually went up for a year as he was in his forties.
Actually if you go to espn.com and check out his icetime, it was around the 16 minute mark. So unless 16 minutes somehow became higher than 18 or 19 (Another one of Messier's suppossed evil powers} THAT fact too is false.

The time he got this time was NOT against the coaches wishes but rather the coach actually him out there to get SOMETHING going. Unfortunatly Messier {for as good as he responded} isn't that type of player anymore. But he wasn't exactly jumping over the boards on Renney or Sather, it was the coach's choice because of how pathetic this team had become.

Quote:
So players in Messier's lockeroom are allowed to speak up freely but they have to be successful to have a leg to stand on? Your contradicting yourself. It's funny but to me only the status symbol players like Nasland (under media pressure) have done the song and dance about Messier helping turn the Canucks into winners after three years of losing under his leadership. Ray Ferraro was always a respected team player and had his run in 92-93.
Actually I'm not if you stop trying to twist and throw facts about a team you don't follow out there {you're already 3 for 3}.

Ferraro didn't click with him, it happens to every team in every city in every sport. But did Ferraro EVER captain a team to a cup? No he didn't. Good guy or not, he had A run, that's it and even that team was a Cinderella story.

I'm not saying Ferraro is a bad guy, but let's look at it from any perspective. The guy who has the rings is the guy and the guy who has the captaincy is the guy who gets the benefit of the doubt. Right, wrong or indifferent. Why does it have that because Ferraro didnt like him that obviously Messier has to be a bad guy?

There are people who don't like you, does that make them bad?

I find it funny that when a player praises Messier he is quote "doing the song and dance about Messier helping turn the teams into winners" but when a player has a problem with him it's obviously true.

I am sure there are players who hate Messier, but I think when you take a survey of those who played with him the one's who liked him will far out way those who didn't.

Quote:
As for mild success in the post season, if Trevor Linden's sub five hundred 1994 Canucks had one more goal Mark Messier may still be hated by Ranger fans today.
And if Kirk McLean didn't play the hockey of his life the series would have been over in four games. And if the Rangers had taken Bossy in the draft, they might have had a dynasty. Hockey has a million "What if's".

Quote:
Linden deserves better but that seems to be how it goes to any potential leader in Messier's lockeroom, the pressure put on Linden to give up his letter was disgraceful.
And i supposed Messier is responsible for the overall good but disappointing career Linden has had and the fact that he was a .5 per game player by the time he was 30?

You can blame the Vancouver management as much as anyone for that situation.

But I guess we gotta add it to the list of things Messier did to ruin the world

Quote:
You win or lose with your best players not a 43 year old. If you cannot win you play the younger players, never a 43 year old. Sather traded for Jagr.
We aren't even contending for chrissakes. For the 900th time, this team is rebuilding. There isn't going to be a lot of winning, there is going to be a lot of learning. Messier isn't being asked to score for this team or lead to a cup next season

Messier was put onto the ice because this team failed. The fact he was out there was an example of that failure. He shouldn't and wouldn't have been out there if Lindros and Nedved had done their jobs.

The issue isn't whether this team should build around Messier anymore, can no one at least grasp that simple point? The team is being built around the younger guys who messier can help adjust to the big life. That's it, that's all, nothing more. I seriously dont know why we keep going on this tangent.

Quote:
To answer your question I say his patience wore thin with fourth line status around oct 28th. Remember this is under the one coach he will work with, I'm sure it was much quicker under Trottier and Low.

http://www.nhl.com/lineups/player/gbg/8449573.html

And as a hockey fan I would say the Rangers season turned on the following dates:
1/28 Washington Messier-19:09
1/30 Buffalo Messier-19:43
1/31 Buffalo Messier-20:26
That's interesting except for one VERY important fact which you didnt check and can see by going to the game log on espn.com

ERIC LINDROS GOT ANOTHER CONCUSSION THEN.

So once again the team was without their supposed first line center.

Another interesting fact, take a look at what both Nedved and Kovalev did during the stretch you just pointed to. NOTHING, nada, zip, zero, zilch.

No one is arguing that Messier can't lift a team like he once did, but again {for the 900th} time WHERE WERE THE CORE PLAYERS during that game. THAT is why this team failed.

If anything when you look at those games those "core" players were held scoreless and had minus ratings.

But lemme guess, that was because of Messier right?

Quote:
It seems to me Carter was a player who had 25 goals in Edmonton at the time of his trade, but when he became a Ranger they did not know where to play him because you cannot make a career right winger, a left wing or a center. But on the Rangers he had Kovalev and Bure. (career right wings in front of him) For a while Kovalev moved to the left and Carter to center. Bure played a little left wing.

Yeah and Carter sure turned it around in Washington and LA. I watched Carter for years in Edmonton, ALL of his points were the benefit of playing with names like Smyth and Weight and Comrie. His numbers are right back where they were BEFORE he went to Edmonton.

Kovalev still wasnt too hot when he went to Montreal either. And on top of that he even defeats the whole Messier argument because throughout his career he was ALWAYS a Messier favorite.

Third of all how in the heck is Messier now responsible for Carter and Kovalev being moved for a few games in desperate {and often stupid} attempts to get them going?


Quote:
Ultimately you take players out of what they do best and they will struggle with their confidence and their games. But if you bring them to your team you win or lose by what they do, not by what 40+ year old player, especially on a team that has not won and holding on does. Messier for all his experience should have been telling that to everyone he came near. Instead he grabbed the reins and did what he has done his entire career, lead by example. He loves a stage.
He grabbed the reins because when the reins were handed to guys to Kovalev and Lindros they fell under the dog gone horses and got trampled. When they were handed to Holik he proceeded to tell everyone who would listen that he didn't like the horses. So then Messier ends up with them again and suddenly he selfishly took them because he wanted the spotlight?

This is unreal. You got this guy painted as Satan on ice over here. It's getting insane.

Quote:
They were secondary figureheads because they had Sather upstairs and Messier downstairs, they were not allowed to do what their experience said needed to be done and because of it players who should have became a good team on paper looked like individuals and played that way.
You're right that must be Lindros got a concussion. He was so angered by the situation that he ran out and slammed his head into something so he didnt have to play. Kovalev then went out and decided to miss the net every chance playing on a different line and Petr Nedved decided to stay on vacation the same way he has at various points throughout his career.

Meanwhile Sather and Messier purposefully gave Anson Carter a CD that subliminally told Anson Carter "that he sucked and needed to float on the ice".

Just for good measure than they made Lundmark's skates uneven so that everytime he got hit he'd fall over and be unable to step up and take the reigns himself.

Afterwards they kicked some puppies, lite fire to the paramount theatre and spent the Rangers budget in an orgy of untamed spending not seen since the 1980's.


Messier laughed and said "Mwahahahaha my plan is almost complete". So he ran to Long Island with fire in his eyes and proceeded to disrupt their lockeroom too. Then he went back to the office, traded his best friend, reduced his icetime and put Lundmark with Jagr and ran Lindros out of town.

Tomorrow he is planning on selling our secrets to the North Korean gov't and collapsing the world economy and hockey as we know it.

Is there anything else we'd like to blame Messier for? Hey Theo Fleury is an alcoholic, it must be Messier's fault.

Quote:
Lesser role? His ice time over three years reduced by a few seconds until this year when he dropped to only 16 minutes, which is skewed by games he did not finish or was ejected to go with the start of the season.
Actually seeing as i've pointed you to espn five times in this thread we could always go with game by game results and watch that as the team sunk and stars with it and as Lindros' body and consistency went to crap that he got some more time.

Or did he simply hijak the team again?


Quote:
I cannot argue with that point. The significant difference being Leetch was in roles where he should have been vs roles Messier should never seen on his best day, but did for reasons that do not make any sense.

The attitude of the organization is run by the same braintrust and leadership in Edmonton in the late 80's. Why is the role of captain that significant? Let the coach lead and whoever has the letter, has the letter.
I dont care if Messier where's a dang Q on his chest, he could wear an X for all i care and still give advice to this teams future leaders.

Quote:
Play Kovalev at center if necessary while Nedved is out and never move Holik from that second line center spot. Maybe Carter in his primary spot (first line right wing) would have found some confidence. If Lundmark was healthy he never should have seen a game outside the center position even if that meant Messier never played on the third line. Aside from that this is not a championship team, ever kid should play over a 43 year old-see Larianov in New Jersey.
So your answer to the problem was to move a guy who was playing worse than Messier into the center spot bases on........what........ i am failing to follow here.

Moving to Kovalev to center would have left us with who exactly as the starting RW? Carter? Lundmark. I'm sorry but I think that would have solved the problem like a bandaid helps a missing limb.

And trying telling the powes that be this wasn't a championship team. Until they finally got it, they kept tring to win.

But ironically when THEY finally understood it, they did just what you said. So again where is the problem?

Quote:
He let it be known he likely was not going anywhere, he got his message out as to what was best for him. After he left for Vancouver the loyality thing is upbecoming and many Ranger fans felt likewise.

So for a team that doesn't have players who wanted to be here, when they finally get one who doesnt want to leave suddenly he is the bad guy again?

{sigh} You're making this a no win situation for the guy now.

Quote:
Because Sather could not sell a Ranger youth movement to Dolan without moving Leetch and making his own statement to everyone which I thought was a mistake. He has never seemed like a huge Leetch or Richter fan. I think the question on Purinton is more why was he not released after he refused to go to the AHL and get in shape and I think because of Messier's support. Hlavac I guess got a million chances because there really was no one else who had his former success, which is why he got a big contract considering he was on waivers, no one was going to take him for anything.
And how is that Messier's fault again? See that's that i mean, this stuff isn't on him. When a team signs a lw like Hlvac and deems him a core player thats the begining of a LONG season. Know what i mean?


Quote:
Messier and Sather do not work well with coaches. A proven winner behind the bench wants control upstairs and down and no interference. They want to be the team leader with the captain secondary to him and the gm keeping quiet in his office. They want no part of a 40 year old with the media in his pocket who is not used to a reduced role or Sather.

You're right because again Messier used some magic power to screw every one of the core players over. He and Sather also made sure that they purposefully ruined Renney's "strategy" {and again it was his, not Sather's if you wanna ask around} so that they could have Sather leave the bench and hand it over to Renney and then name him fulltime coach over the summer.

Wha...... Huh....... Uhhh.......

Quote:
This process that reportedly included Messier being offered the job. Trottier was a gutsy choice by Sather, but he never had a fair chance doing things his way, from day one he was secondary to the captain and gm and that does not work unless you have a winning team in place already.
When a coach cant remember to call a line change or puts too many men on the ice, i think the team is in trouble even without his decisions.
But i gotta ask, if he was a Kings Hall of Famer and not an islander player, would you even try to defend the disaster that was his hiring?

Quote:
Messier does not want to go out with seven years out of the playoffs. It's one thing to qualify and show progress but quite another to go out as poorly as the Rangers have gone out these last few years under his leadership. I do not think he wants it to end like this and he can clearly still play.
If he doesn't want to out with seven years without a playoffs, then why sign up for a team that is guranteed to have an 8th, probably a 9th and maybe a 10th.

Come on now, we both know we can stike that one off the list.

Quote:
Never wrote that about those players. Messier left three teams directly over money when he had the choice (although Lowe held out for a trade over money too) it was telling when after three years in Vancouver as soon as Brian Burke did not pick up his option he made no effort to stay.
Messier left Edmonton because his friends were gone, it was time for a change and after Sather lowballed him {the same Sather he does actually like} he wanted to move on.

Don't even get me started on the BS that was his leaving in 1997, to even put that one on Messier you're REALLY gonna have to come back with some facts and twist em. And the Vancouver situation was the end of a bad marriage.

He signed for probably the same contract he would have gotten in Vancouver.

As for his heart only being into money, that must be exactly why he flew to Edmonton to participate in a game at freezing temperatures.


Quote:
I'm sorry, I did not write he does what he does for control, I did write he cannot help himself and knows no other way and it's his biggest weakness. How many media people here talk about if he can take a lesser role, they are not asking the other players or the coaches, they ask if Messier will do so and talk of his presence.
And he was willing last year when this team was {unfaily} expected to contend.

This year they aren't and i thin he'd take a reduced roll again if asked.

Messier knows full well who his linemates will be, that within itself is a lesser role without even saying anything else.

Edge is offline  
Old
07-23-2004, 10:53 PM
  #78
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Graveytrain
Messier can do all those things from behind the bench....But in the end, his selfishness will rule the day, as always

We said goodbye and paid him his due respect, enough already....If this Orginization can't find someone else to teach a few kids to keep their head up when the Media starts barking then we're in worse shape then we think....

What's next, he's going to tuck Murray in before nap time? Tie his skates?
No he can exactly what he did for a certain player whose name you have chosen as your screen name.

Edge is offline  
Old
07-23-2004, 11:06 PM
  #79
Graveytrain
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 204
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
No he can exactly what he did for a certain player whose name you have chosen as your screen name.
Are you serious? he's 43.... this is beyond comical

Graveytrain is offline  
Old
07-23-2004, 11:20 PM
  #80
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
What does his age have to do with him guiding him on life in NY, the responsibilities of leadership and how to handle certain unique elements of NY.

No one is saying hire him to be his linemate and turn him into scorer.

Edge is offline  
Old
07-23-2004, 11:34 PM
  #81
Graveytrain
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 204
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
What does his age have to do with him guiding him on life in NY, the responsibilities of leadership and how to handle certain unique elements of NY.

No one is saying hire him to be his linemate and turn him into scorer.
exactly, there is nothing Messier cannot accomplish from being behind the bench... there is no need for him to take a regular shift here anymore...its time to move on...

We all know he will end up skating 17 mins a night loafing around while the kids have to work 3 times as hard... how much longer must we be the joke of the league... this is really getting old, literally

Graveytrain is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 12:30 AM
  #82
little a from da bx
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 375
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=Edge]Lol what the hell are you talking about? I didn't say we were arguing i said "we can see what that argument is going". It's a figure of speech. How's this "We can see where that discussion is going..."


Is that better? LOL.



grow up man cause with the way u are talking u sound like u are 12, if not than u need to grow up kid, other words u are told u are wrong u get mad, u will say anything to sound right dont care how many posts u have or how many of these little kids are on these threads think u are always right, remember they are little kids 12 -16 . so dont feel to cocky ... how about that ....lol

little a from da bx is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 01:34 AM
  #83
Brooklyn Ranger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn, of course
Posts: 8,200
vCash: 500
Hey Edge

Just wanted to say that the only reason I have kept reading this thread is because of your posts. Very well said and extremely coherent too!

Brooklyn Ranger is online now  
Old
07-24-2004, 03:30 AM
  #84
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
exactly, there is nothing Messier cannot accomplish from being behind the bench... there is no need for him to take a regular shift here anymore...its time to move on...
There is a big difference between an assitant coach and a guy who is in the lockeroom talking to the guys after the game.

Even the most liked assitant coaches in hockey have an automatic wall because they arent a player. That is the exact purpose of a captain to be a leader in the lockerroom. A coach's job is to instruct the kids on how to play, the captain and a veteran is there to teach the more intangible things.

I dont want him teaching them how to shoot, skate, pass and cover their man. I want him teaching them the little in's and outs of being in NY. Of conserving your energy on long road trips on what he eats as a pregame meal, and other little stuff that coaches generally dont go into.

Quote:
We all know he will end up skating 17 mins a night loafing around while the kids have to work 3 times as hard... how much longer must we be the joke of the league... this is really getting old, literally
Considering the team isnt expected to compete and he wont have million dollar disasters in front of him, i honestly dont believe that will happen. I think everyone {Messier included} know exactly what the goal is next season. Winning next year is secondary to learning and growing as players. When the team doesn't win for 8 games in a row, they aren't expecting someone to come in do something, anything to get the team a win.

Edge is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 03:39 AM
  #85
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by little a from da bx
grow up man cause with the way u are talking u sound like u are 12, if not than u need to grow up kid, other words u are told u are wrong u get mad, u will say anything to sound right dont care how many posts u have or how many of these little kids are on these threads think u are always right, remember they are little kids 12 -16 . so dont feel to cocky ... how about that ....lol

Oh spare me. The only reason i said that is because with everything that has been said the only thing you could point to was a stupid figure of speech that you totally took the wrong direction.

I could care less if people love me, hate me or are indifferent. I don't know any of these people and i'm not interested in making "cyber friends".

I'm right and I'm wrong and i'm everything inbetween. I have no problem with any of the people who have disagreed with me, hell NYIsles and me debate ALL the time for pages upon pages. But if we're gonna sit here and pick and hack at the different between the phrase "I can see where this argument is going" and "I can see then this discussion is going" then the point is already lost.

I have no problem with your belief on Messier whatsoever, though we disagree. But if we're gonna sit here and go back and forth about the difference in a stupid phrase like that, then you're 100% right this will be along the lines of a 12 year old.

Edge is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 12:09 PM
  #86
Graveytrain
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 204
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
There is a big difference between an assitant coach and a guy who is in the lockeroom talking to the guys after the game.

Even the most liked assitant coaches in hockey have an automatic wall because they arent a player. That is the exact purpose of a captain to be a leader in the lockerroom. A coach's job is to instruct the kids on how to play, the captain and a veteran is there to teach the more intangible things.

I dont want him teaching them how to shoot, skate, pass and cover their man. I want him teaching them the little in's and outs of being in NY. Of conserving your energy on long road trips on what he eats as a pregame meal, and other little stuff that coaches generally dont go into.



Considering the team isnt expected to compete and he wont have million dollar disasters in front of him, i honestly dont believe that will happen. I think everyone {Messier included} know exactly what the goal is next season. Winning next year is secondary to learning and growing as players. When the team doesn't win for 8 games in a row, they aren't expecting someone to come in do something, anything to get the team a win.


you have to let go sometime... if not now when, at age 47, 53, when?

We are the joke of the league not just for our record, but the way this team is run...

Poti, Kasparaitus, Dunham aren't million dollar disasters?.... I still don't put it past Slats to sign another player in this mold... This season is about winning as much as the last 7 have been....

I can't believe we need a 43 year selfish SOB to tell a few kids what to eat and when to sleep... that is pretty funny :lol

Graveytrain is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 01:37 PM
  #87
NYIsles1*
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 9,539
vCash: 500
Edge, your coming off like J.D proclaiming him for backchecking at 200mph after not husting back for the gwg the previous game. It's upbecoming and disappointing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
Actually it's not one or the other. First off a dispute between a player and a coach has happened a thousand times, that doesn't mean the player has input to the front office which includes, trades, signings, callups, etc. BIG difference.
One of your comments were: Messier doesn't control this organization and any comment with that remark is from someone who has never even sniffed within a mile of what goes on within the offices.

Then you wrote:

His move on Nielson was the right call and so far his call on Renney hasn't exactly been off either has it? Now if he had problems with Bowman, Keenan and Arbour we're talking about a different story. But when the problems were with guys named Renney, Low and Trottier than sad to say he was right to some extent.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
Secondly even on top of all that you're talking about an 11 year difference and two different owners, gm's and situations.
Clearly in your own words this player does have some control behind the scenes and has under two owners, gm's, whether you care to admit it or not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
Thirdly the argument that he "sway" in the front office doesnt even make sense because otherwise with the so called problems you claim he has with Renney, Renney would not be such an intrigal part of this organization and certainly wouldn't have been on the coaching staff.
I'm sure when Renney was brought in Sather asked Messier if he had any objections, Messier never has a problem with folks who are lower on the teams pecking order and know it going in. Only when they are in the situtations of leadership, does it become a problem with Messier's leadership.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
Ron Low finished over .500 in edmonton? You wanna try that one again from the top?
Apparently not. I was off by a game or so, point being he could get a team into the playoffs. I stand corrected.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
As for Trottier the ONLY head coaching experience he had was in Portland which was.....a disaster to say the least. Suffice to say his second head coaching experience with the Rangers, was even worse. Sorry but in this case there is actual evidence to support that claim.
What evidence is that?

That line change in a win over the Islanders (and a shocking honest J.D reaction to it) would he have held his mouth if Sather was coaching?

Edge, you have seen enough hockey to know that on many teams the head coaches do not even call the line changes as the game is played, that the assistants handle these things and in many cases during a timeout the head coach will not even be in the pack of players drawing up a play. Trotts was an easy target for Ranger management at the time and J.D is considered management.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
You seem to recall wrong then, because even recently there was talk about the contention between the two and how Schoenfeld was often the one who seemed to be running the bench.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/ho...p-182778c.html</FONT>

If you want more you'll have to find those yourself.
So your telling me is this week-old article that because the Ranger assistant coaches were picked by management and not the coaches that the assts did not like or work well with Trottier? Where it that article is it written these coaches had problems with Trottier? What is true of reports these assistants did not get along with each other. Refreshing that Sather let Renney pick some people for himself this time around, is there another NHL team that does not do it that way?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
Schoenfeld didn't take the job because {As most people who are fans of them and regulars here would testify} he most likely did not want to be the lame duck coach for a team that was too dysfunctional to make the playoffs.
Now it's time for me to produce a link and those comical were going to the playoff comments with the reported comments of Sather and Schoenfeld, I think that was the first time Messier had something to say to the press since he signed that year.

http://cbs.sportsline.com/nhl/story/6159429

When Schoenfeld was asked questions about Trottier shortly before the game, he answered one but appeared close to tears during a second response and abruptly ended his remarks.

He just hated Trotts, didn't he?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
Please, Renney was the one running all the systems and practices for this team. Renney was essentially the coach for the entire term. Again you can ask anyone on these boards about that {whether they agree with me about messier or not}.
So that's like 3 for 3 on things that simply weren't true.
So now Renney was running the team all last season? I thought he designed the trap that the veterans could not or would not play like other teams?

Aside from being incorrect about Low's record (by two games) in Edmonton your
1-2.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
The time he got this time was NOT against the coaches wishes but rather the coach actually him out there to get SOMETHING going. Unfortunatly Messier {for as good as he responded} isn't that type of player anymore. But he wasn't exactly jumping over the boards on Renney or Sather, it was the coach's choice because of how pathetic this team had become.
You do not know that, I do not know that. All that can be said is Messier if he were really a team leader would be the first to tell the coaches you need to work in these kids. Aside from that he does what he wants and ignores coaches not named Sather.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
Ferraro didn't click with him, it happens to every team in every city in every sport. But did Ferraro EVER captain a team to a cup? No he didn't. Good guy or not, he had A run, that's it and even that team was a Cinderella story.
And when people who have some leadership skills and speak up they do not stay long on Mark Messier's teams. Msg got tired of his act (after a terrible 1997 playoff where Lindros owned him) and choose Gretzky and a more conservative approach with another star Oiler marquee name after he would not take a reduced contract.

Messier went to Vancouver, took the captain's job from Linden and soon after Renney was out for Keenan and both got Linden's way of doing things out of Vancouver. (but it was one of the great steals in league history-another topic)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
I'm not saying Ferraro is a bad guy, but let's look at it from any perspective. The guy who has the rings is the guy and the guy who has the captaincy is the guy who gets the benefit of the doubt. Right, wrong or indifferent. Why does it have that because Ferraro didnt like him that obviously Messier has to be a bad guy?
This is not about what kid of person anyone is and all of them do a lot of good for the game. (especially Messier) It does however again scream that your point about Messier doesn't control this organization is completely wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
I find it funny that when a player praises Messier he is quote "doing the song and dance about Messier helping turn the teams into winners" but when a player has a problem with him it's obviously true.
You should know that answer by heart. Star players do not want to hurt their marketing potential by saying things that are controversial. What benefit would it do Nasland to rip a legend like Messier in Canada? Odjick pulls no punches because he has nothing to lose. If Ferraro kept it going on Messier, Espn suits may call him on the carpet and tell him, enough is enough, were in the business of selling hockey.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
And if Kirk McLean didn't play the hockey of his life the series would have been over in four games. And if the Rangers had taken Bossy in the draft, they might have had a dynasty. Hockey has a million "What if's".
That's not the point, you wrote: Do any of the players who have criticised even have to leg to stand on in terms of success? Names like Odjick and Linden and Ferraro. All guys who NEVER won a cup and never achieved anything more than mild success in the post season.

It was more than mild success leading a sub five-hundred team to game seven of the Stanley Cup Finals. I'm sorry what Linden did was incredible and not mild and is to this day is worshiped in Vancouver, which is why he is back with the Canucks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
And i supposed Messier is responsible for the overall good but disappointing career Linden has had and the fact that he was a .5 per game player by the time he was 30? You can blame the Vancouver management as much as anyone for that situation.
Linden has to answer for his own career. All I can say is that Vancouver had most of it's 1994 team together with Bure in his prime and they were playing to win. Along comes Messier and the team goes from contender that spent significant revenue to off the map for three years, when they finally showed signs of a turnaround after three yeas, Messier was gone the minute his option was not picked up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
Messier was put onto the ice because this team failed. The fact he was out there was an example of that failure. He shouldn't and wouldn't have been out there if Lindros and Nedved had done their jobs. The issue isn't whether this team should build around Messier anymore, can no one at least grasp that simple point? The team is being built around the younger guys who messier can help adjust to the big life. That's it, that's all, nothing more. I seriously dont know why we keep going on this tangent.
All the more reason he should not have been on the ice. You do not replace Braden Looper or Armondo Benitez with John Franco if your in last place. You play everyone but Franco. But unlike Franco Messier's carrer has stood for having to be the guy to the point where it's counter-productive, he cannot help himself and he was writers willing to spin it any way he wants it as gospel.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
Another interesting fact, take a look at what both Nedved and Kovalev did during the stretch you just pointed to. NOTHING, nada, zip, zero, zilch.
No one is arguing that Messier can't lift a team like he once did, but again {for the 900th} time WHERE WERE THE CORE PLAYERS during that game. THAT is why this team failed. But lemme guess, that was because of Messier right? If anything when you look at those games those "core" players were held scoreless and had minus ratings.
Big deal. You lose with those players, peirod.

It's impossible for these veterans to develop chemistry knowing how quickly Messier willingly jumps into the top lines and disrupts what little does work. Win or lose you stick with your best, on the Rangers a point comes and Messier has to lead by example and plays in roles he has no business playing. If it were one coach you could blame the coach but when several coaches have problems controlling this mans minutes and media people are asking if his influence is bigger than the coach and a distraction, it's time to call it what it is. It's been this way going back to the day he became a Ranger, only now he cannot back it up.

And no doubt, Sather is still loyal to Messier, when Trottier wanted him to be a fourth line player Messier, Sather and Trottier likely sat down and was talked out of it or told no. It was doomed from that moment on. Lindros even was pushed to right wing so Messier (under Trottier) could be the center with Nedved and Holik and the fact it, Sather did it too which suggests it was his idea when Trottier was coach and under orders.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
Third of all how in the heck is Messier now responsible for Carter and Kovalev being moved for a few games in desperate {and often stupid} attempts to get them going?
It was not just a few games, if it were just the game Doig hit Lindros that's different if there are injuries, but were talking about a player who the last three years played 18,18, 16 minutes a game, in roles where even the media cannot understand why and stop short by blaming the coaches and Sather because they know it's leading right to Messier.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
He grabbed the reins because when the reins were handed to guys to Kovalev and Lindros they fell under the dog gone horses and got trampled. When they were handed to Holik he proceeded to tell everyone who would listen that he didn't like the horses. So then Messier ends up with them again and suddenly he selfishly took them because he wanted the spotlight? This is unreal.
If he were this leader you paint him as he would have done the right thing behind the scenes and made sure everyone but him got a chance. Leader? Sure. Team player? No. It Never happened.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
Actually seeing as i've pointed you to espn five times in this thread we could always go with game by game results and watch that as the team sunk and stars with it and as Lindros' body and consistency went to crap that he got some more time.

Or did he simply hijak the team again?
I'm sorry but what did Messier do on the top lines? Did have five goals between early December and March when the competitive part of the season ended and Sather went back upstairs?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
So your answer to the problem was to move a guy who was playing worse than Messier into the center spot bases on........what........ i am failing to follow here.
Moving to Kovalev to center would have left us with who exactly as the starting RW? Carter? Lundmark. I'm sorry but I think that would have solved the problem like a bandaid helps a missing limb.
He seemed to do very well at the center's position for Mario in Pittsburgh. Sure was a better alternative than a 43 year old.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
And trying telling the powes that be this wasn't a championship team. Until they finally got it, they kept tring to win. But ironically when THEY finally understood it, they did just what you said. So again where is the problem?
And guess who was part of the power to be and wanted to lead a team to the playoffs and another cup. He knows no other way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
He and Sather also made sure that they purposefully ruined Renney's "strategy" {and again it was his, not Sather's if you wanna ask around} so that they could have Sather leave the bench and hand it over to Renney and then name him fulltime coach over the summer.
Let's just say old dogs do not like to learn new tricks, I'm not saying anyone intentionally tried to ruin anything. It should be noted that it seems Renney's did an about face on trapping. You either have the players to play that system or you do not. A Western Confernce gm and captain from Edmonton are not the best choices, especially when they hold the cards and can make it or break it by how they sell it to the players.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
When a coach cant remember to call a line change or puts too many men on the ice, i think the team is in trouble even without his decisions. But i gotta ask, if he was a Kings Hall of Famer and not an islander player, would you even try to defend the disaster that was his hiring?
I have been defending Low and Renney and Nielsen also, it's not about Trottier being a former Islander. If Robinson took the job I might well be writing the same things about him.

Here are two articles, one that says a lot and questions why Trottier was giving Messier all these minutes. The other talks about the team Trottier was playing in December because of injuries.

http://cgi.canoe.ca/HockeyPuckmaster/1127.html

Trottier and Messier waged some fierce battles in the early '80s when both the Islanders and Oilers were battling each other for the Stanley Cup and both have a mutual admiration for each other, but Trottier needs to start acting more like a coach and less like a peer and reduce Messier's minutes.

Maybe now that Messier is recovering from a sore neck, Trottier can take some of his minutes and give them to Lindros. It should be no surprise that Lindros played his best two periods this season on Monday, after Messier left the game in the first.

Trottier's favouritism towards Messier may have also accounted for Bobby Holik's horrible start (two points in 10 games), before the big centreman suffered a hip injury that has sidelined him for the past 14 games. Trottier had Holik, whom general manager Glen Sather signed to a ludicrous five-year, $45-million US deal in the summer, playing on the third line behind both Messier and Lindros to start the season. It will be interesting to see what happens with the minutes when Holik comes back next week and Trottier must find time for he, Messier, Lindros and Nedved
*******************
Does it make any sense that Trottier said at his press conference Messier should play 8-10 minutes a game on the fourth line and when the season opens the exact opposite of what he said happened?

Seems to me like he was under orders from Sather and or Messier as to the captain's role and what he said he was going to do was not done. He had no prayer to make it work from that point on.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/ins...dolie_insider/

While high-priced Pavel Bure, Holik, Brian Leetch and Mike Richter all have missed significant time with injuries this season, Trottier had to turn to journeymen like Joel Bouchard, Cory Cross, Gordie Dwyer, Richard Lintner and John Tripp. It's a tough challenge to end a five-year playoff drought with AHL talent like that in your lineup every night.

NYIsles1* is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 06:04 PM
  #88
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
One of your comments were: Messier doesn't control this organization and any comment with that remark is from someone who has never even sniffed within a mile of what goes on within the offices.

Then you wrote:

His move on Nielson was the right call and so far his call on Renney hasn't exactly been off either has it? Now if he had problems with Bowman, Keenan and Arbour we're talking about a different story. But when the problems were with guys named Renney, Low and Trottier than sad to say he was right to some extent.


Clearly in your own words this player does have some control behind the scenes and has under two owners, gm's, whether you care to admit it or not.
No but now your changing what you said. You've gone from total control to some control and we've gone from he controls everything to he has a say. So right we're changing the parameters for which your talking about. Does he have some say? Yes and so do other captains and veterans. We could sit here all day and list captains who have SOME input into things.

Quote:
I'm sure when Renney was brought in Sather asked Messier if he had any objections, Messier never has a problem with folks who are lower on the teams pecking order and know it going in. Only when they are in the situtations of leadership, does it become a problem with Messier's leadership.
And where was the apparent problem last season?


Quote:
That line change in a win over the Islanders (and a shocking honest J.D reaction to it) would he have held his mouth if Sather was coaching?

Edge, you have seen enough hockey to know that on many teams the head coaches do not even call the line changes as the game is played, that the assistants handle these things and in many cases during a timeout the head coach will not even be in the pack of players drawing up a play. Trotts was an easy target for Ranger management at the time and J.D is considered management.

That would fly if the EXACT same things weren't said about him during his stint in Portland and many rumblings even before hand were that Avs weren't exactly sad to see him go.

But somehow that doesn't matter, but obviously the story against Mess has to. I mean if we're gonna look at the issue we do have to look at it from all the angles.

But now we're changing it from Messier causing it to the Rangers. Maybe, just maybe there is a reason why Trottier hasn't made it through a whole season of EITHER or his head coaching experiences. Just maybe.....

Quote:
So your telling me is this week-old article that because the Ranger assistant coaches were picked by management and not the coaches that the assts did not like or work well with Trottier? Where it that article is it written these coaches had problems with Trottier? What is true of reports these assistants did not get along with each other. Refreshing that Sather let Renney pick some people for himself this time around, is there another NHL team that does not do it that way?
These reports were circulating when Trottier was coach too, it wasn't a secret. But I mean that's my job to look up every single article for everyone on these boards because they happened not to read them and thus happen not to want to believe them. I mean this is what happens everytime you come on here and we debate, i end having to do all the research {sometimes successful sometimes impossible}.

Quote:
When Schoenfeld was asked questions about Trottier shortly before the game, he answered one but appeared close to tears during a second response and abruptly ended his remarks.

He just hated Trotts, didn't he?

There was no secret about the dessention, nobody likes getting anyone fired per say. I mean if we wanna play this game then we can talk about Messier not being exactly all smiles after Nielson was let go. Just because too people have philosophical differences and can't work together doesn't mean they have to have satanic like feelings of harm towards one another.

But no offense you're commenting on a team that isn't your own and as a result you haven't read certain articles or even know when certain players were hurt and the results of icetime. Again i am not throwing that out as an insult, but these articles are known by people who were on here at the time. It's not like this is some "new" issue that we all just became aware of, though it seems to be news to you. Again don't take that as an insult because its not meant to be.

Quote:
So now Renney was running the team all last season? I thought he designed the trap that the veterans could not or would not play like other teams?

Aside from being incorrect about Low's record (by two games) in Edmonton your
1-2.
Yes Renney was running the systems and was responsible for the practices. In fact Sather {which was another reason why he shouldnt have been coach} was pretty much there just to show up for the games. That is one reason why so many people questioned Renney with what is going and thus the comment you've seen {or haven't seen} with regards to people saying they liked him better in the player personnel department.

And one or two games in Low's record {in one particular season} is still noteworthy nonetheless. The problem was that his team's never really went anywhere. They might have a suprise here and there, but they were honestly pretty average in their performance.

Quote:
You do not know that, I do not know that. All that can be said is Messier if he were really a team leader would be the first to tell the coaches you need to work in these kids. Aside from that he does what he wants and ignores coaches not named Sather.
And who is to say he didn't. We could rehash what you just said, You do not know that, I do not know that. BUT when the kids were in the lineup it WAS Messier who talked to them and took them out and helped them adjust. That is something we DO know.


Quote:
And when people who have some leadership skills and speak up they do not stay long on Mark Messier's teams. Msg got tired of his act (after a terrible 1997 playoff where Lindros owned him) and choose Gretzky and a more conservative approach with another star Oiler marquee name after he would not take a reduced contract.
Barnaby sure seemed to last a while. McCarthy was a guy {Who despite by dislike for him as a player} was a vocal locker room member.

But your accusation would have to be a two way street wouldn't it? If people who speak their mind don't last long, guys who support Messier wouldnt go anywhere right? So why was Graves treated the way he was. Again it just doesn't fly nor make any sense.

And regardless of people's feelings towards Messier right now, just about anyone would tell you that the Rangers and MSG's handling of the Messier situation in 97 was this organizations worst personality traits at its best. Did Lindros own Messier? You bet, but Ewing was getting owned on a nightly basis by Shaq and Mourning and other centers and MSG found a way to get him. It was all business {and bad business} and even many people who want Messier gone now would tell ya that.

Quote:
This is not about what kid of person anyone is and all of them do a lot of good for the game. (especially Messier) It does however again scream that your point about Messier doesn't control this organization is completely wrong.

See now it is back to "control" again. It was control, than he had sway, now control again. Which one is it?

I've given a laundry list of reasons that is proven untrue {the control aspect} while all thats come the other way is a thousand assumptions and half facts in an effort to throw a thousand things against the wall and pray that something, anything sticks. At this point it's fishing.

Messier has some say, but not total control and nearly as much as you want to lay on him. Two guys he supposedly hated {Renney and Nedved} were both here for a while. Guys who supposedly he'd never let go {Leetch and Graves} were both traded in his time here. I mean this is just the tip of the iceberg and are direct contradictions to what some are trying to claim, so we just keep throwing stuff out there hoping for anything to catch.

Quote:
You should know that answer by heart. Star players do not want to hurt their marketing potential by saying things that are controversial. What benefit would it do Nasland to rip a legend like Messier in Canada? Odjick pulls no punches because he has nothing to lose. If Ferraro kept it going on Messier, Espn suits may call him on the carpet and tell him, enough is enough, were in the business of selling hockey.
Guys like McCarthy have nothing to lose, so do other guys who have long since retired.

So those must obviously have something wrong because they don't fit into the argument one is trying to present. Again we are trying so hard to stack the deck here. When a player disagrees there is clearly something there. When he doesn't he is clearly protecting his image. When players who have long since stopped playing dont say anything, well they are clearly in Messier's clique. I mean seriously you can't make a fair case against someone when every chunk of evidence that disproves a point is thrown out. It's a no win situation.
Quote:
That's not the point, you wrote: Do any of the players who have criticised even have to leg to stand on in terms of success? Names like Odjick and Linden and Ferraro. All guys who NEVER won a cup and never achieved anything more than mild success in the post season.
So therefore because they prove the point you want to make {or believe} there opinion is gospel and people who are successful obviously must be hiding something or lying.

Is that about what it comes down to?

Quote:
It was more than mild success leading a sub five-hundred team to game seven of the Stanley Cup Finals. I'm sorry what Linden did was incredible and not mild and is to this day is worshiped in Vancouver, which is why he is back with the Canucks.
He is there because he is a nice player and because what else do they have to worship a player about? Seriously, what would YOU celebrate as a fan? But who has Linden ever lead to a championship in the NHL.

And you and I both know that the two key players to that were Mclean and Bure. Take nothing away for Linden but history remembers the team that ultimately won, not that team that almost won. The same is true for your Islanders dynasty. People remember them because they won, not because they almost won.

Quote:
Linden has to answer for his own career. All I can say is that Vancouver had most of it's 1994 team together with Bure in his prime and they were playing to win. Along comes Messier and the team goes from contender that spent significant revenue to off the map for three years, when they finally showed signs of a turnaround after three yeas, Messier was gone the minute his option was not picked up.
Playing to win?

1993-94 Pacific 84 41 40 3 0 85 0.506 279 276 1923 Pat Quinn Lost in Finals
1994-95 Pacific 48 18 18 12 0 48 0.500 153 148 1093 Rick Ley Lost in round 2
1995-96 Pacific 82 32 35 15 0 79 0.482 278 278 1546 Multiple coaches Lost in round 1
1996-97 Pacific 82 35 40 7 0 77 0.470 257 273 1607

That's playing to win? A combined record of 85-93-34 and one season above .500 was playing to win? They sneak into the playoffs with a .500 and sub .500 record and now they were on some verge of greatness till Messier arrived?

If that's true then you and i aren't even in the same universe of what a successful progressing team is. I dont know what else to say on that.

Quote:
All the more reason he should not have been on the ice. You do not replace Braden Looper or Armondo Benitez with John Franco if your in last place. You play everyone but Franco. But unlike Franco Messier's carrer has stood for having to be the guy to the point where it's counter-productive, he cannot help himself and he was writers willing to spin it any way he wants it as gospel.
At the time with Vancouver the believe WAS that Messier could be that guy, but the case is about what Messier brings to next years team not the 97-98 Canucks from seven seasons ago.

Again we are getting into obscure issues that have nothing to do with the subject in a futile attempt to throw something, anything at the wall and make it stick.

I mean if we're gonna argue about 7 seasons ago than we gotta debate why Graves isn't on the team and argue about a still only 24 year old Kovalev.

What did Messier do last year {a point everyone has still avoided while drawing back to events from in some cases 10 years ago}. You guys on the other side of the issue still haven't put together a solid case for the other end of opinion spectrum.


Quote:
It's impossible for these veterans to develop chemistry knowing how quickly Messier willingly jumps into the top lines and disrupts what little does work. Win or lose you stick with your best, on the Rangers a point comes and Messier has to lead by example and plays in roles he has no business playing. If it were one coach you could blame the coach but when several coaches have problems controlling this mans minutes and media people are asking if his influence is bigger than the coach and a distraction, it's time to call it what it is. It's been this way going back to the day he became a Ranger, only now he cannot back it up.
That's BUNK. Those guys had the time to develop chemistry. They were switched around with each, not with Messier. So based on that approach, if their chemistries were off it was amongst each other.

You're right you do win and lose with the player who is playing the best, but what does it say that Messier was at points the best player. It says something is seriously wrong with the way this team is put together.

You're right Messier shouldn't be the go to guy, but what does it say he was thrown into that roll. You can't win with your best when they are playing worse than a guy who shouldnt be your best. Again that is EXACTLY the point.

Quote:
And no doubt, Sather is still loyal to Messier, when Trottier wanted him to be a fourth line player Messier, Sather and Trottier likely sat down and was talked out of it or told no. It was doomed from that moment on.
And what was that based on? You essentially wanna throw out Trottier's mistakes and faults and lack of success with the job, but somehow this should be the end all say all. Again, are we gonna look at it from all angles or are we gonna throw out what would debunk a theory? I'd prefer to do the latter.
Quote:
Lindros even was pushed to right wing so Messier (under Trottier) could be the center with Nedved and Holik and the fact it, Sather did it too which suggests it was his idea when Trottier was coach and under orders.
Lindros was pushed to the right side because he was off to one of the most inauspacious starts of his career and this team was dropping fast right out of the gate. You also AGAIN conviently throw out that Lindros was centered by HOLIK more than anyone else in an effort to jump start his season. In fact that was a poll question on here during the time, "Should Lindros be moved back to Center or stay on Holik's right" it was actually an interesting debate. Many people wanted to keep him on the right side. The question lingered into the start of this season as well.

Now if Lindros were hot and conviently moved to Messier's line than that possibly could work, but they were trying to stack a ling with Holik to get some juice flowing. Again how in god's name is that Messier's fault?


Quote:
It was not just a few games, if it were just the game Doig hit Lindros that's different if there are injuries, but were talking about a player who the last three years played 18,18, 16 minutes a game, in roles where even the media cannot understand why and stop short by blaming the coaches and Sather because they know it's leading right to Messier.
And lemme ask you something in return? How have Nedved and Lindros performed the last two seasons? But I forgot their performance is now somehow Messier's fault.

So theoretically your only problem is that Messier got icetime while two centers who were supposed to be the teams go to guys lingered through 24 months of mediocrity?

So along those lines, who instead gets the icetime? The mediocre players?

Even going by the numbers, both Holik and Nedved had a higher average on ice time as did Rucinsky.

Lindros would have had a higher number but games he got knocked out of after 7 minutes still count as whole games so that brings that down.

So for all the talk about Messier stealing icetime and this and that, he was statistically third amongst centers and if not for Lindros injuries he is actually fourth. (at it's current level its a whopping 30 seconds more} so even playing devil's advocate and saying he played too much {in my opinion a result of some piss poor play by other centers who didnt step it up} he still ranked third amongst the centers and easily could have been fourth.

I mean cmon now, this is getting like a witch hunt now. It's the old tests for witches. If they drown "Well i guess they aren't witches....too bad they are dead." Yet if they swim then "Clearly they are witches". At this point whatever he does, no matter whether the facts say other wise by number or by action or by whatever, you're gonna find SOMETHING to try and get him for.


Quote:
If he were this leader you paint him as he would have done the right thing behind the scenes and made sure everyone but him got a chance. Leader? Sure. Team player? No. It Never happened.
Actually it was those chances for those players year after year after year after year for SEVEN YEARS that has gotten this team into it;s current situation. The team has had the same problem with and without Messier. Because time after time, after time, after time, after time we've tried to rebuild careers. The running gag with this team is that we are everyone's second chance. Berard, Fleury, Barnaby, Simon, Toms, Dixon Ward.

The only players this team HASNT given chances to was the rookies until now and guys like Malhotra were done while Messier wasn't even here.

But to say this team doesn't give these overpaid pansies chances is as upsurd as saying the Islanders didn't play enough young talent in the mid 90's.

Quote:
I'm sorry but what did Messier do on the top lines? Did have five goals between early December and March when the competitive part of the season ended and Sather went back upstairs?
And remind me again what our core players did?

Quote:
He seemed to do very well at the center's position for Mario in Pittsburgh. Sure was a better alternative than a 43 year old.
Yeah he also scored 30 more goals with Pitts than NY. So now {another one to add to the list} is that now somehow Messier kept Kovalev from the Center spot?

So lemme get this straight, now he;s not only responsible for the guys he doesn't like, but he's intimidating the players who he has a good past with? A player who played center on a team with Messier before?

You still didn't address the point that with Kovalev moving to center the only two "Scoring" wingers the team would have would be Rucinsky and....Carter. Yikes....... THAT is scary.

With Kovalev now at center the question becomes "Who does he center". Anson Carter? This scenario is getting more and more scary.

Quote:
And guess who was part of the power to be and wanted to lead a team to the playoffs and another cup. He knows no other way.
Who else stepped up?!?!?! Can you point to one other player who did anything???????????? And don't even try to blame Messier for that, that is a poor excuse under any set of circumstsances.

Quote:
Let's just say old dogs do not like to learn new tricks, I'm not saying anyone intentionally tried to ruin anything. It should be noted that it seems Renney's did an about face on trapping. You either have the players to play that system or you do not. A Western Confernce gm and captain from Edmonton are not the best choices, especially when they hold the cards and can make it or break it by how they sell it to the players.
The problem with this team is that it wasn't built to play ANY system. They failed at run and gun. They failed at the trap. I mean I think this team could have the other team only dress 10 players and they'd still find a way to break.

The bigger problem is that when you have a defense with great defenders like Poti, Purinton and others and your top 6 forwars contains Hlavac neither system is exactly gonna work.


Quote:
Trottier and Messier waged some fierce battles in the early '80s when both the Islanders and Oilers were battling each other for the Stanley Cup and both have a mutual admiration for each other, but Trottier needs to start acting more like a coach and less like a peer and reduce Messier's minutes.
And you also missed some key points in the article which actually prove the point I was making. Here are some highlights:

Eric Lindros and Pavel Bure had their best games of the season in breaking 16- and 10-game goal-scoring droughts. Lindros actually hit something other than the penalty box and showed some intensity and Bure displayed the wheels that earned him the nickname "The Russian Rocket."

So again what do we see? Slumping stars.

Lindros again vanished as soon as Trottier returned, going pointless and being a minus-3 in a 4-4 tie with the Devils and a 3-1 loss to the Islanders

Another point i made....

Both Bure and Lindros are seeing less ice time than fellow forwards Messier, Petr Nedved, Ronald Petrovicky and Mikael Samuelsson. That combined with their poor starts to the season likely have both Bure and Lindros second guessing their abilities and wondering if they have lost a step. However that didn't appear to be the case when Trottier was out of the lineup, especially with regards to Bure.

So Nedved and Samuelsson were getting some time and when Trottier was out, Bure's minutes went up..... okaaaay..... interesting aspect of some differences of opinion about Bure and the approach of the team.

Quote:
this is relatively the same underperforming team that Colin Campbell, John Muckler and Ron Low failed to inspire
BTW Campbell and Muckler tried doing without that "evil lockerrom cancer known as Messier".

Quote:
Trottier won the job over more qualified candidates in Ken Hitchcock and Dave Tippett, who have guided the Flyers and Stars to the top of their respective divisions.
Bingo, bongo, blamo. Again there is more to this issue than just some Messier conspiracy.



Quote:
Maybe now that Messier is recovering from a sore neck, Trottier can take some of his minutes and give them to Lindros. It should be no surprise that Lindros played his best two periods this season on Monday, after Messier left the game in the first.
And he also went onto play some great games with Messier in the lineup. But Lindros as a Ranger was NEVER the same {or a consistent player} since a concussion he got on a bump in his FIRST season against SJ.

His disappearing act would continue for another season and half after this article. When give infinat chances to spark him including assignments with players named Kovalev, Bure, Jagr, Holik, and Rucinsky.

But the team clearly didn't put enough effort forth. Not with guys like Amonte, LeClair out there who should have been part of the revolving door of scoring wingers trying to get lindros going.

It's obvious the team failed him.....

Quote:
Trottier's favouritism towards Messier may have also accounted for Bobby Holik's horrible start (two points in 10 games), before the big centreman suffered a hip injury that has sidelined him for the past 14 games. Trottier had Holik, whom general manager Glen Sather signed to a ludicrous five-year, $45-million US deal in the summer, playing on the third line behind both Messier and Lindros to start the season. It will be interesting to see what happens with the minutes when Holik comes back next week and Trottier must find time for he, Messier, Lindros and Nedved
And going back further into the archives we see that both Lindros and Nedved average over 20 mins a game during that 2002-2003 season, more than Messier {who again got all of 30 seconds more time than the fourth center and in that case {Holik} too missed time.

I believe before that {the 2001-2002 season) he again ranked third amongst centers.

So 3 years running he was third amongst centers and two years running just slightly above the guy who was fourth. And for all the talk of what a disaster he was defensivly and guys covering his butt, he managed to break out even in his last 195 games. That doesn't make him a defensive forward but it also doesn't make him as much of a liability as some say.

So that again creates a contradiction. If he breaks even he was somehow with defensive players to cover him, but yet he supposedly scores by getting plumb assignments with scorers over the other centers.

Even we played devils advocate and allowed for that in regards to goals, that still would attribute where his 63 assists came over the same time. And they werent all on the powerplay. That of course though isnt even the argument because the issue is leadership.

But frankly there haven't been a variety of points to disclaim that and there haven't been a ton for his actual play either. But somehow we'll end up in another out of left field accusation in a little bit.
And for the the last two seasons


Quote:
Does it make any sense that Trottier said at his press conference Messier should play 8-10 minutes a game on the fourth line and when the season opens the exact opposite of what he said happened?
Dont ask me, as the guy who was supposedly coaching. Also ask him what happend to Lindros and Bure a combination that was supposed to carry the first line.

Quote:
Seems to me like he was under orders from Sather and or Messier as to the captain's role and what he said he was going to do was not done. He had no prayer to make it work from that point on.
So again because Trottier failed as a coach it HAS to be because of Messier?

So what was Campbell's excuse in 98? Or Mucklers to end 98, 99 and 2000?

But i already know how this one works, lemme take a stab at it.

On the one hand if Messier plays he is forcing his way into lineup. Yet when Messier sat at the end and the kids played, he obviously mustn't have had an interest in playing right? But just to hedge our bets, if he DOES sign up to play with the kids he obviously must have greed and himself in mind.

Does that about cover all the bases for a southpark like "Blame Messier" campaign?

Look I don't think Messier is the player he once was and i dont believe he should play as much, BUT i think he only played that much because of the factors surrounding other players and the poor building of this team. He playesd alright in that roll but he's not being brought back to be a player he being brought back to be a leader and the only evidence to say he shouldn't it so outlandish and slanted and conspiracy theoried that it sounds like we are writing an Oliver Stone picture.

Before you write a response and we throw more stuff against the wall in an effort to make it stick, just remember this one thing. When the chips were down last year and this team had nothing left to win, and Messier had no more scoring records to break and his people jumped on him for being a captain who missed the playoffs for 7 straight seasons Mark Messier still held himself with class. He didn't take a single parting shot, he didn't make any promises of retirement or declare it, and he took the time to talk to each and every one of those kids knowing full well that IF he retired he'd had have no stake in their future. THAT is what makes him still a good leader to have around these despite all that shots people try to take or the snide remarks or any other outlandish thing that has been said.

Despite all the people trying to trash him, he never spoke badly of Vancouver or the other players. He never spoke badly of Fleury when he was literally making a joke of himself and spiraling into this disease. He never called out Kovalev or Lindros when they slumped. He let Holik say whatever he wanted, whether he disagreed with it or not. Guys like Barnaby and Holik lent their voices {despite the accusation that Messier was the only one talking}.

When people said he needed less icetime, he took less ice time. When his team ASKED him to step up and carry the team he tried, even though his skills to do so had long since passed. When they complained he didn't let people speak, he let Barnaby, Holik and Lindros talk to the media while he hung in the background. When they said he couldnt handle the kids, he bought each of em a suit, listend to all of them and talked to all over them and met with each personally when the season ended. When all of us where battling for or belittling his greatness, he never waivered. When his friends were traded he didn't demand to go with them, when the team he supposedly ditched for money {the Oilers} asked him to come back and play in freezing temperatures he did it. Yet he's still had people take shots at him, give half facts and make assumptions out the window about situations they claim "they didn't need to be there to know". Still Messier went out and helped his new younger teammates and made sure that if it was indeed the end of his career in NY that he said goodbye the right way this time. Still there will be those of you for whom that just isn't good enough. For me my last 3 paragraphs is especially why it's every reason that it is.


Last edited by Edge: 07-24-2004 at 06:08 PM.
Edge is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 09:01 PM
  #89
barnaby63
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Long Island
Posts: 860
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=little a from da bx]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
Lol what the hell are you talking about? I didn't say we were arguing i said "we can see what that argument is going". It's a figure of speech. How's this "We can see where that discussion is going..."


Is that better? LOL.



grow up man cause with the way u are talking u sound like u are 12, if not than u need to grow up kid, other words u are told u are wrong u get mad, u will say anything to sound right dont care how many posts u have or how many of these little kids are on these threads think u are always right, remember they are little kids 12 -16 . so dont feel to cocky ... how about that ....lol

Edge sounds like a kid? He isnt the one going around saying LOL all the time or u this or u that.

Learn how to type before telling someone they are talking like a 12 year old.

U are 2 funny! LOL!

barnaby63 is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 09:03 PM
  #90
NYIsles1*
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 9,539
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
That would fly if the EXACT same things weren't said about him during his stint in Portland and many rumblings even before hand were that Avs weren't exactly sad to see him go. But somehow that doesn't matter, but obviously the story against Mess has to. I mean if we're gonna look at the issue we do have to look at it from all the angles.
If there were reports of problems with Portland, let's see them? The people in Colorado raved about Trottier and said he would make an excellent head coach, the Msg p.r machine sure did not go there when he was hired. I sure wanted to know how he did with Portland and wondered how he did.

The stories about Messier are legendary of how he does not work well with people, it's just the way it is.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
I mean this is what happens everytime you come on here and we debate, i end having to do all the research {sometimes successful sometimes impossible}.
In our little debates here I'm usually the one to bring the links and give tangible examples with quotes while you tell me how many Ranger jersey's and internet hits they are getting and how popular they are nationwide I do my own homework and know the local perspective very well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
But no offense you're commenting on a team that isn't your own and as a result you haven't read certain articles or even know when certain players were hurt and the results of icetime. Again i am not throwing that out as an insult, but these articles are known by people who were on here at the time. It's not like this is some "new" issue that we all just became aware of, though it seems to be news to you. Again don't take that as an insult because its not meant to be.
None taken. I know my hockey and the Rangers are not the team you own just as I do not own the Islanders. We have our perspectives and follow the pulse of what happens in our own way. As a local fan I read on all three teams as much as possible and always have.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
Barnaby sure seemed to last a while. McCarthy was a guy {Who despite by dislike for him as a player} was a vocal locker room member.
Even more vocal last summer when he got to Boston. Seems like lot's of former Rangers have plenty to say upon exiting. What was it Kovalev said, everyone wants the glory but no one wants to work for it? Who do you think that is a reflection of?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
But your accusation would have to be a two way street wouldn't it? If people who speak their mind don't last long, guys who support Messier wouldnt go anywhere right? So why was Graves treated the way he was. Again it just doesn't fly nor make any sense.
Graves time was over regardless of whether he was loyal to Messier or not, he played like his back was killing him, there was no place else to hide him on an old team.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
And regardless of people's feelings towards Messier right now, just about anyone would tell you that the Rangers and MSG's handling of the Messier situation in 97 was this organizations worst personality traits at its best. Did Lindros own Messier? You bet, but Ewing was getting owned on a nightly basis by Shaq and Mourning and other centers and MSG found a way to get him. It was all business {and bad business} and even many people who want Messier gone now would tell ya that.
First of all you should know this as well as you know the marketing. Msg is the Knicks, not the Rangers and on their best day are an afterthought. The Knicks come first because that's where the money and the media are. If it comes down to Ewing (a career Knick) vs Messier (who won five cups in Canada) Messier loses hands down every time. The garden took care of their signature homegrown star attraction.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
I've given a laundry list of reasons that is proven untrue {the control aspect} while all thats come the other way is a thousand assumptions and half facts in an effort to throw a thousand things against the wall and pray that something, anything sticks. At this point it's fishing.
Unless your around this team daily all your telling us is your version which is also assumptions and half facts based on what you are told or read. I know what I have read and seen and it does not add up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
He is there because he is a nice player and because what else do they have to worship a player about? Seriously, what would YOU celebrate as a fan? But who has Linden ever lead to a championship in the NHL.
What did Ranger fans celebrate as fans before 1994? Giaconmin, Gilbert, Espo. I guess it works both ways. Point being Linden did something special.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
That's playing to win? A combined record of 85-93-34 and one season above .500 was playing to win? They sneak into the playoffs with a .500 and sub .500 record and now they were on some verge of greatness till Messier arrived?

If that's true then you and i aren't even in the same universe of what a successful progressing team is. I dont know what else to say on that.

At the time with Vancouver the belief WAS that Messier could be that guy, but the case is about what Messier brings to next years team not the 97-98 Canucks from seven seasons ago.
Clearly the year they brought in Messier they were playing to win and felt they were ready. They had a lot of good talent on that team, for some reasons it failed and Messier was given a lot of blame. And he held his grudges when Gretzky came to town and invited Leetch but not his former Oiler friend to a party, that made some news too at the time. Even worse Gretzky had a great game and burried the Canucks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
What did Messier do last year {a point everyone has still avoided while drawing back to events from in some cases 10 years ago}. You guys on the other side of the issue still haven't put together a solid case for the other end of opinion spectrum.
A solid case? Last year was the best of times for Messier, he had his coach, his media and he had no impact but kept playing more than he should have. Aside from his personal goals he went virtually invisible as did the team.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
You're right you do win and lose with the player who is playing the best, but what does it say that Messier was at points the best player. It says something is seriously wrong with the way this team is put together. You're right Messier shouldn't be the go to guy, but what does it say he was thrown into that roll. You can't win with your best when they are playing worse than a guy who shouldnt be your best. Again that is EXACTLY the point.
What point, they lost with him, they can lose without him. He had minimal impact at his best while countless times goals were scored and you would see #11 roll by the screen while the opposition was celebrating. I would watch and just be amazed at why he is in that role. All I could do was think of the past and how he could never help himself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
Now if Lindros were hot and conviently moved to Messier's line than that possibly could work, but they were trying to stack a ling with Holik to get some juice flowing. Again how in god's name is that Messier's fault?
Because he is not the type who sits on a fourth line for long, especially if things are going wrong. I can see them finding ways to get him involved, this was it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
And lemme ask you something in return? How have Nedved and Lindros performed the last two seasons? But I forgot their performance is now somehow Messier's fault.
They have to answer for their own games. But when Messier takes their minutes he should be answering for that because at this stage of his career it makes no sense whatsoever.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
So theoretically your only problem is that Messier got icetime while two centers who were supposed to be the teams go to guys lingered through 24 months of mediocrity? So along those lines, who instead gets the icetime? The mediocre players?
I had no problem. I was fascinated by how they could find ways to lose with all that talent. They added Jagr and lost to Ottawa 9-1. Who get's the icetime, once again if you are not a winning team, everyone but a 43 year old player. He should have resigned his captaincy and let the team take a new direction entirely, every other move was tried for the last two years but that one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
Even going by the numbers, both Holik and Nedved had a higher average on ice time as did Rucinsky. Lindros would have had a higher number but games he got knocked out of after 7 minutes still count as whole games so that brings that down. So for all the talk about Messier stealing icetime and this and that, he was statistically third amongst centers and if not for Lindros injuries he is actually fourth. (at it's current level its a whopping 30 seconds more} so even playing devil's advocate and saying he played too much {in my opinion a result of some piss poor play by other centers who didnt step it up} he still ranked third amongst the centers and easily could have been fourth.
He should not have been in the same area code as these players in terms of minutes win or lose that's the whole point, it makes no sense unless this is the way he had to have it for himself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
Actually it was those chances for those players year after year after year after year for SEVEN YEARS that has gotten this team into it;s current situation. The team has had the same problem with and without Messier. Because time after time, after time, after time, after time we've tried to rebuild careers. The running gag with this team is that we are everyone's second chance. Berard, Fleury, Barnaby, Simon, Toms, Dixon Ward.
I'll tell you what I think. It took three years for the organization to be rid of his overbearing influence and looked lost leaderless without him. When he came back he was too old but had to jump back in as if it were still the early nineties.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
The only players this team HASNT given chances to was the rookies until now and guys like Malhotra were done while Messier wasn't even here.
What is it called when a ninth overall pick who is a natural center plays another position for a forty year old. How did Jamie Lundmark not be this teams third line center daily no matter what it took?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
You still didn't address the point that with Kovalev moving to center the only two "Scoring" wingers the team would have would be Rucinsky and....Carter. Yikes....... THAT is scary. With Kovalev now at center the question becomes "Who does he center". Anson Carter? This scenario is getting more and more scary.
A former first line right wing in Edmonton playing first line right wing for the Rangers is scary? Maybe on a Messier-Sather led team but elsewhere this was considered a good player.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
Who else stepped up?!?!?! Can you point to one other player who did anything???????????? And don't even try to blame Messier for that, that is a poor excuse under any set of circumstsances.
No one did anything. I can only blame Messier for playing a role he should not have been in. I think it was a distraction and a problem.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
The problem with this team is that it wasn't built to play ANY system. They failed at run and gun. They failed at the trap. I mean I think this team could have the other team only dress 10 players and they'd still find a way to break.
Not the Islanders. Seems the Isles were the only team the Rangers could look past Messier and the problems on this team and play to their abilities. Six times is no coincidence. Right afterward the Isles always started winning and status quo returned to the Rangers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
And you also missed some key points in the article which actually prove the point I was making. Here are some highlights:

Eric Lindros and Pavel Bure had their best games of the season in breaking 16- and 10-game goal-scoring droughts. Lindros actually hit something other than the penalty box and showed some intensity and Bure displayed the wheels that earned him the nickname "The Russian Rocket."

So again what do we see? Slumping stars.

Lindros again vanished as soon as Trottier returned, going pointless and being a minus-3 in a 4-4 tie with the Devils and a 3-1 loss to the Islanders

Another point i made....

Both Bure and Lindros are seeing less ice time than fellow forwards Messier, Petr Nedved, Ronald Petrovicky and Mikael Samuelsson. That combined with their poor starts to the season likely have both Bure and Lindros second guessing their abilities and wondering if they have lost a step. However that didn't appear to be the case when Trottier was out of the lineup, especially with regards to Bure.
Trottier was out of the lineup three games. Schoenfeld won three games, this year Sather did not win three games in a row. You can spin those articles but they point out why was Messier overplayed by a man who said he should not be any more than a fourth line player? No one wanted to find out because all roads lead to the captain.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
And going back further into the archives we see that both Lindros and Nedved average over 20 mins a game during that 2002-2003 season, more than Messier {who again got all of 30 seconds more time than the fourth center and in that case {Holik} too missed time. I believe before that {the 2001-2002 season) he again ranked third amongst centers. So 3 years running he was third amongst centers and two years running just slightly above the guy who was fourth. And for all the talk of what a disaster he was defensivly and guys covering his butt, he managed to break out even in his last 195 games. That doesn't make him a defensive forward but it also doesn't make him as much of a liability as some say.
Again, he was in their neighborhood minutes-wise, why? What was the point.

Good thing they do not keep track of plus/minus when shorthanded.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
So again because Trottier failed as a coach it HAS to be because of Messier?
So what was Campbell's excuse in 98? Or Mucklers to end 98, 99 and 2000?
But i already know how this one works, lemme take a stab at it.

On the one hand if Messier plays he is forcing his way into lineup. Yet when Messier sat at the end and the kids played, he obviously mustn't have had an interest in playing right? But just to hedge our bets, if he DOES sign up to play with the kids he obviously must have greed and himself in mind.

Does that about cover all the bases for a southpark like "Blame Messier" campaign?
Not with me, I think all these posts defending him from so many are getting to you.

I have not gone there with this topic. If he played that role I would have nothing to write about the present and thought he played his role properly, but for reasons that make no sense it did not happen that way at all and raises questions.

Here's a good question. How come Gretzky played here and never had these problems to this degree at the end. Did Gretzky push the coaches around and demand special miuntes or have the problems Messier had in all the places he played? Aside from taking one look at Keenan and bolting St.Louis?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
Look I don't think Messier is the player he once was and i dont believe he should play as much, BUT i think he only played that much because of the factors surrounding other players and the poor building of this team. He playesd alright in that roll but he's not being brought back to be a player he being brought back to be a leader and the only evidence to say he shouldn't it so outlandish and slanted and conspiracy theoried that it sounds like we are writing an Oliver Stone picture.
The only thing outlandish is that he had that role or was captain at all after he returned. Team players do not even think twice about making sure the next generation inherits the letter. Potvin won four cups as captain and the Isles had elections when he announced it was his final year. It would have been better to put the letter in a hat monthly than give in to a 43 year old. Trottier wanted a team election.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
Before you write a response and we throw more stuff against the wall in an effort to make it stick, just remember this one thing. When the chips were down last year and this team had nothing left to win, and Messier had no more scoring records to break and his people jumped on him for being a captain who missed the playoffs for 7 straight seasons Mark Messier still held himself with class. He didn't take a single parting shot, he didn't make any promises of retirement or declare it, and he took the time to talk to each and every one of those kids knowing full well that IF he retired he'd had have no stake in their future. THAT is what makes him still a good leader to have around these despite all that shots people try to take or the snide remarks or any other outlandish thing that has been said.
First of all I do not throw things about walls to make them stick, there are two sides to a discussion. As for the 2003-04 Rangers the chips were almost never down for a team that did not win three games in a row. As for holding himself with class, many others saw it another way when Leetch was traded. It should not be a credit to someone that they do not take a parting shot. Again, maybe you should ask why people are taking so many shots? People did not take shots at Gretzky.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
Despite all the people trying to trash him, he never spoke badly of Vancouver or the other players. He never spoke badly of Fleury when he was literally making a joke of himself and spiraling into this disease. He never called out Kovalev or Lindros when they slumped. He let Holik say whatever he wanted, whether he disagreed with it or not. Guys like Barnaby and Holik lent their voices {despite the accusation that Messier was the only one talking}.
You come off as if that is noble of something that he did not speak out against Fleury, btw he did take his shots when he said this year the Rangers signed a lot of non-winners who did not play for the Ranger sweater the previous seasons and they had to get more Ranger-type players in here. (not exact words)

Bobby Holik (like everyone) is entitled to say whatever he wants and he could care less what Sather or Messier thought. He allowed Holik to speak? My guess he Messier dare not go near him and try and stop him or someone was gone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
When people said he needed less icetime, he took less ice time.
I'm sorry but what game was this, the game in Washington he did not attend or the games he was suspended?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
When his team ASKED him to step up and carry the team he tried, even though his skills to do so had long since passed. When they complained he didn't let people speak, he let Barnaby, Holik and Lindros talk to the media while he hung in the background. .
And two of the three wanted no part of the New York Rangers. Barnaby went to a team worse off than the Rangers. Carl Lindros said plenty about the operation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
When they said he couldnt handle the kids, he bought each of em a suit, listend to all of them and talked to all over them and met with each personally when the season ended. When all of us where battling for or belittling his greatness, he never waivered. When his friends were traded he didn't demand to go with them, when the team he supposedly ditched for money {the Oilers} asked him to come back and play in freezing temperatures he did it. Yet he's still had people take shots at him, give half facts and make assumptions out the window about situations they claim "they didn't need to be there to know". Still Messier went out and helped his new younger teammates and made sure that if it was indeed the end of his career in NY that he said goodbye the right way this time. Still there will be those of you for whom that just isn't good enough. For me my last 3 paragraphs is especially why it's every reason that it is.
I never wrote he was a bad person and have no doubts he cares about the kids on the Rangers. I do write he cannot help himself in the leadership department and it's his biggest weakness and why he should not return.


Last edited by NYIsles1*: 07-24-2004 at 09:22 PM.
NYIsles1* is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 10:45 PM
  #91
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Poti, Kasparaitus, Dunham aren't million dollar disasters?.... I still don't put it past Slats to sign another player in this mold... This season is about winning as much as the last 7 have been....

Well under a possibly new labor agreement he's gonna have an interesting time with that.

Quote:
I can't believe we need a 43 year selfish SOB to tell a few kids what to eat and when to sleep... that is pretty funny :lol
You're right because the case of him being a selfish sob is just so compelling

You're right it is pretty funny though, what's even funnier is how many of these kids will actually need that. Again one of the more intriguiging elements of playing in NY.

But again that selfish SOB as you call him is the reason why the reason you even know an Adam Graves to use as a screen name.

In your own words.....that is pretty funny.

Edge is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 11:58 PM
  #92
Graveytrain
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 204
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
Well under a possibly new labor agreement he's gonna have an interesting time with that.



You're right because the case of him being a selfish sob is just so compelling

You're right it is pretty funny though, what's even funnier is how many of these kids will actually need that. Again one of the more intriguiging elements of playing in NY.

But again that selfish SOB as you call him is the reason why the reason you even know an Adam Graves to use as a screen name.

In your own words.....that is pretty funny.

:lol and again, youve shown nothing that Messier cannot do from behind the bench... give it up already...Youve shown nothing that suggests Messier will accept a proper role on the ice if he returns.... but hey as long as he knows how to order a nice steak he can skate as long as he likes eh?

Graveytrain is offline  
Old
07-25-2004, 12:27 AM
  #93
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
If there were reports of problems with Portland, let's see them?
Jeez, you gotta be kidding. Ya know how hard is to find some articles from two years on the vast, unkept library that is the internet?

Here is one that touch's on it {i searched for 30 minutes reading through all kinds of articles many of whom now have dead links}.

http://www.sportsline.com/b/page/pre...7535%2C00.html

But lemme give a summary of what the BIG concerns were, many of which were overlooked while everyone was hyping Trottier as the right choice.

He coached the Portland Pirates for one season but evidently lost interest in doing the day in and day out job of training and planning for the role. Needless to say he quit right after the playoffs and moved back into an assitant role, this time with the Avs.

There was also more than few whiphers that for all the well wishes colorado gave that they were a little....shall we say a little "too" willing to go ahead and let him go.

If you're looking for the articles i'm sorry but your gonna have to do that yourself, i'm just too busy with this senator stuff to look more articles about my team that you somehow missed from a few years back.

Quote:
The people in Colorado raved about Trottier and said he would make an excellent head coach, the Msg p.r machine sure did not go there when he was hired. I sure wanted to know how he did with Portland and wondered how he did.
There were A LOT of people who said the hiring was a bit odd and that though they "thought" he would be a very good coach, there was no way to really tell yet because his only other head coaching experience was a .500 effort for a season in Portland. See a pattern here with all these coaches who are hovering around .500 with their previous efforts?

Quote:
The stories about Messier are legendary of how he does not work well with people, it's just the way it is.

In our little debates here I'm usually the one to bring the links and give tangible examples with quotes while you tell me how many Ranger jersey's and internet hits they are getting and how popular they are nationwide I do my own homework and know the local perspective very well.
And the stories about him lifting players up are also legendary but once AGAIN you fail to address that at all. In fact whenever i mention it, you skirt away to something.

You're the one giving the tangible evidence? Um you were the one who couldn't even go to hockeydb.com to check coaching records or check the storyline for the games you claimed changed the seasons. You also failed to produce anything other than your opinion to back the islander claim up. The links you did post i pointed out key points you missed while providing them. Points that actually contradicted the points you were trying to make.

So that's doing the research? Offering your opinion while asking me to find articles you somehow can never remember and asking me to scour the internet to find them for you isn't doing research. it's making someone else double check things for you.

For someone who did his hw, as you claim you haven't actually addressed the corrections i made about your claims in this thread. You've just tried going a different direction.....several times until we've done a complete circle. And we'll do it again, which at this point i have no problem with.

Quote:
None taken. I know my hockey and the Rangers are not the team you own just as I do not own the Islanders. We have our perspectives and follow the pulse of what happens in our own way. As a local fan I read on all three teams as much as possible and always have.
But you clearly are a little bit more out of your element with the rangers here.

Quote:
Even more vocal last summer when he got to Boston. Seems like lot's of former Rangers have plenty to say upon exiting. What was it Kovalev said, everyone wants the glory but no one wants to work for it? Who do you think that is a reflection of?
McCarthy didn't say anything about Messier, he said he wondered why he wasn't resigned. How did you get your claim from THAT???? Considering the fact that he and Messier were also pretty close would actually still contradict any claim you could make about Messier running him out of town.

McCarthy's most vocal comments were about the fans who boo'd him during a preseason game.

Despite all that the Rangers STILL brought him back off waivers despite the fact his career was about as dead as a doornail. So that still don't get what points you were attempting to make with that.

Oh Kovalev made a comment about not working for? Hmm a guy with 13 goals and a disappointing season commenting about guys working for things. But that makes sense, his season certainly makes him a credible source on the futility of effort and the lack of success as a result.

Quote:
Graves time was over regardless of whether he was loyal to Messier or not, he played like his back was killing him, there was no place else to hide him on an old team.
But yet you attempted to use McCarthy as an example before and his career is just about as done {if not more} than Graves was. So which one is it?

Quote:
First of all you should know this as well as you know the marketing. Msg is the Knicks, not the Rangers and on their best day are an afterthought. The Knicks come first because that's where the money and the media are. If it comes down to Ewing (a career Knick) vs Messier (who won five cups in Canada) Messier loses hands down every time. The garden took care of their signature homegrown star attraction.
You're right the only problems were that A. At the time the Rangers were actually the more successful franchise and B. The signing of Messier had NOTHING to do with the knicks. They were actually turning a nice profit on both at the time.

It wasn't a business decision in the sense of "we only have the money to keep one, so we went with the team with the higher market share".

That point becomes even more enhances by the even larger amounts of money the team spent afterwards getting players for the Rangers.

Quote:
Unless your around this team daily all your telling us is your version which is also assumptions and half facts based on what you are told or read. I know what I have read and seen and it does not add up.
How is it assumption, i worked for the dang franchise for the better part of 5 years. I work in the industry and am around it 24/7. Though I'm not directly linked to the franchise anymore, you can darn well bet i am around them a lot. Often times more than i would like to be.

If you know what you've read why couldn't you even pick out the points that totally contradicted what you said?

Quote:
What did Ranger fans celebrate as fans before 1994? Giaconmin, Gilbert, Espo. I guess it works both ways. Point being Linden did something special.
The debate isn't whether a team has hero's so much do you really think those guys would have been kept over guys who were coming from say, the Habs dynasty? No they wouldn't and thus the Canucks went with the guy they felt came from the better pedigree. But again we're getting sidetracked by the fact that it was on them, not Messier.


Quote:
Clearly the year they brought in Messier they were playing to win and felt they were ready. They had a lot of good talent on that team, for some reasons it failed and Messier was given a lot of blame. And he held his grudges when Gretzky came to town and invited Leetch but not his former Oiler friend to a party, that made some news too at the time. Even worse Gretzky had a great game and burried the Canucks.
Wasn't that also the same story that Gretzky cleared up by saying his wife was in town?

Quote:
A solid case? Last year was the best of times for Messier, he had his coach, his media and he had no impact but kept playing more than he should have. Aside from his personal goals he went virtually invisible as did the team.
He had his coach? But didn't you just say in an earlier post that he had something against Renney and was simply keeping his mouth shut on the issue.

Again were flip flopping, which one is it?

He was virtually invisible? If he was then what the heck were kovalev, lindros and nedved? Forget invisible, they were non-existent.

For someone who was "virtually" invisible he still had more goals than those young core guys who we've also established got more icetime.

Quote:
What point, they lost with him, they can lose without him. He had minimal impact at his best while countless times goals were scored and you would see #11 roll by the screen while the opposition was celebrating. I would watch and just be amazed at why he is in that role. All I could do was think of the past and how he could never help himself.

But for the 901st time, he isn't supposed to be an impact player. You keep ignoring that when i say it and you refuse to address it. HE - WAS - NOT- ASKED - TO- BE - THE - IMPACT- PLAYER. The others guys who we can't even say were "virtually invisible were". Every point he had was-seen-as-a-bonus.

Quote:
They have to answer for their own games. But when Messier takes their minutes he should be answering for that because at this stage of his career it makes no sense whatsoever.
Taking whose minutes?!?!?! I just got done showing you he got less minutes than them.

Again you claim earlier you do your research and this and that, yet you can't even read the simple numbers i JUST put in front of you.

Where did he rank amonst centers icetime? THIRD. How many years in a row? TWO and possibly three.

And WHOSE icetime did he take away? You keep saying them, but they got more icetime than him at the same position. So WHOSE did he take away?

Quote:
I had no problem. I was fascinated by how they could find ways to lose with all that talent. They added Jagr and lost to Ottawa 9-1. Who get's the icetime, once again if you are not a winning team, everyone but a 43 year old player. He should have resigned his captaincy and let the team take a new direction entirely, every other move was tried for the last two years but that one.
Alright i am once again gonna call you out out on the numbers with the icetime

In that game Nedved and Lindros BOTH got more icetime than him at the center position {20 mins for Petr and over 16 for Lindros}. Holik got 12:23 but also spent 6 minutes in the penalty box.

Messier got a whopping total of.....14:51 seconds good enough to rank a whopping fifth amongst forwards. He likely gets pushed to sixth if Kovalev also doesnt spent 4 minutes in the box {for his minus 2 performance he got all of 30 seconds less time} and probably seventh if Holik doesn't sit for 6 minutes including a double minor for high sticking and a lazy hooking penalty in the first that if Messier did you'd be screaming bloody murder.

So do we wanna try a fourth game now or are we at least willing to admit that the though Messier isn't perfect he isn't exactly a landmine on skates either. I think you can at least see that.

Quote:
He should not have been in the same area code as these players in terms of minutes win or lose that's the whole point, it makes no sense unless this is the way he had to have it for himself.
So tell me, who do you throw out there with Holik in the box, with Nedved already at 20 minutes and Lindros himself again not to far removed from coming back from injury.

If the question was meant as a seasonal remark, than we still have to ask ourselves how he got the time in the first. Which in a circular like pattern takes us right back to the play of Nedved and the other centers. Who whether they got 20 minutes of 16, couldn't seem to do a darn thing with it.

But see now that we've proven the icetime and gamelog theories to be false we're already starting to shift the claim to a new area to see if that might stick.

Quote:
I'll tell you what I think. It took three years for the organization to be rid of his overbearing influence and looked lost leaderless without him. When he came back he was too old but had to jump back in as if it were still the early nineties.
So in the same breath he was overbearing and yet they were lost without him. Here we go again.......

Quote:
What is it called when a ninth overall pick who is a natural center plays another position for a forty year old. How did Jamie Lundmark not be this teams third line center daily no matter what it took?

Well here's a good reason, BECAUSE THEY SWITCHED HIM TO RIGHT WINg IN HARTFORD!

The reason because he wasn't cutting it as a center against AHL talent and actually showed life after being moved to the right side.

In fact up until the end of the season, his future seemed almost destined to be a winger and not a center.

Thirdly he clicked on Holik's right but guess who took his spots? No it wasn't Messier {lets end that theory before it starts} it was Lindros and Carter and whoever else needed a "jump" in their game.

Then Lundmark was somehow switched BACK to center where he didn't do as good yet again. Because somehow this team thought that a guy who struggled as a center at the AHL level, would somehow be able to do it at the NHL level.

Quote:
A former first line right wing in Edmonton playing first line right wing for the Rangers is scary? Maybe on a Messier-Sather led team but elsewhere this was considered a good player.
No a guy who anytime in his career couldn't do jack without Weight or Smyth on the first line is scary.

A guy who couldn't do a thing on the ice was scary. A guy who continued to do nothing in Washington is scary.

A guy who continued to do nothing afterwards in LA is scary.

A guy who wasn't even qualified in LA is scary. A guy who is now sitting at home as a UFA is scary.

A guy who probably will have to go back to a pumb assignment playing with Smyth again to put anything remotely close to his number is.....you guessed it, scary.


Quote:
Trottier was out of the lineup three games. Schoenfeld won three games, this year Sather did not win three games in a row. You can spin those articles but they point out why was Messier overplayed by a man who said he should not be any more than a fourth line player? No one wanted to find out because all roads lead to the captain.
But you've once again totally ingnored the comments about the players in that article. See you're again steering away from it......


Quote:
Again, he was in their neighborhood minutes-wise, why? What was the point.

Good thing they do not keep track of plus/minus when shorthanded.
And again, WHY was he in the neighborhood. What have discussed for the better part of two days now with ya?

And so now the next thing to throw at the wall is something with such concrete proof as "too bad they don't have a stat that proves this?"

What next? I mean sheesh this is getting insane now.....

Quote:
Not with me, I think all these posts defending him from so many are getting to you.

From so many? Lol you're the only way making even the remotest of cases. Saying "he's an old greedy sob" isn't a point, it's an almost teenage stick your tongue out and out your hands in your ears routine.

Actually what IS getting to me is the fact that you haven't produced one shred of anything that has proof behind it and you haven't addressed one bounce back question.

You're ignoring what your own articles said, your getting records confused, your conviently forgetting game logs, you're claiming to do research yet not actually looking up simple stats and facts on as simple of a site as espn.com

I mean i'm actually finding this quite amusing if for nothing else that as far as a case goes, you've pretty much got nothing and you know it. That's one reason why on this issue i just keep posting because the further we've gotten down this thread the more desperate the attempts have been to paint the picture that we are increasingly seeing is not the one you first tried to make it out to be.

If i was getting annoyed or it was getting to me, i wouldnt be wasting my time on the issue. Instead i'm actually finding reasons to post again on what is usually a down time in the year.

Quote:
I have not gone there with this topic. If he played that role I would have nothing to write about the present and thought he played his role properly, but for reasons that make no sense it did not happen that way at all and raises questions.
Sure ya would because you'd be fishing like you were now. There'd be some obscure thing to throw out there that would easily be disproved by the actual evidence and it still wouldn't be enough.

I mean we both know we disagree on the issue, but we also both know that people are reading this thread who aren't posting {or really dont care and who can blame em} and I'm just trying to show that this situation {much like anything else in life} is not as one sided as some will try to make it nor can it be summed up with comments that are barely above the level of saying "He sucks because he's bald....bald people suck....".

For me, this is just another day at the office.

Quote:
Here's a good question. How come Gretzky played here and never had these problems to this degree at the end. Did Gretzky push the coaches around and demand special miuntes or have the problems Messier had in all the places he played? Aside from taking one look at Keenan and bolting St.Louis?
Did he or did you just not want to comment on the icetime he was getting in his last {and most highly ineffective} last season where he got icetime over a 27 year old Nedved, and two talented, developing young centers named Malhotra and Savard {not to mention a kid named Dube' in the system at the time who wasnt beyond the realm of a callup}.

But see that's the no win situation we've created here. Gretzky plays ahead of legit talented young centers like Nedved, Savard and Malhotra you dont mention it. Yet when Messier plays behind thirty somethings like Nedved, Holik and {likely an injury free} Lindros it's a different story.

If you also remember that time period you also remember that people on here were wanting to see Savard and Malhotra play more and then i wouldn't call them "Happy" when Gretz got hurt, they were sure excited to see a 1-2-3 comination of Nedved-Savard-Malhotra.


Quote:
First of all I do not throw things about walls to make them stick, there are two sides to a discussion.
First of all that is exactly what you're doing, look at the amount of flip-flops and new attempts you've taken since the first post.

Quote:
As for the 2003-04 Rangers the chips were almost never down for a team that did not win three games in a row.
Second of all you still haven't even touched by remark about the core players stepping up.

Quote:
As for holding himself with class, many others saw it another way when Leetch was traded.
Third of all i am sure that once again those were the only ones you payed attention to right?

Quote:
It should not be a credit to someone that they do not take a parting shot. Again, maybe you should ask why people are taking so many shots? People did not take shots at Gretzky.
Fourth of all Gretzky's infamous comment was "If I would have known Mark would leave, I never would have signed here". So we'll let that one float around for a little bit okay.

If you'd like I could even give you the book, page number and source of where he was quoted as saying that.

Lastly, when Gretz had retired this team had missed the playoffs for two years....a far cry from the 7 they are currently at.

For the same reason why if Mark would have played his last campaign in 2002 the bitterness of fans towards anything associated with this titanic disaster of a team would have been mellowed.

Quote:
You come off as if that is noble of something that he did not speak out against Fleury, btw he did take his shots when he said this year the Rangers signed a lot of non-winners who did not play for the Ranger sweater the previous seasons and they had to get more Ranger-type players in here. (not exact words)
How is that a parting shot? That's like me saying "We need to get more reasonable posters in here at hockeysfutue" and that somehow being used in an argument that i was 'mocking people's beliefs'?


Quote:
Bobby Holik (like everyone) is entitled to say whatever he wants and he could care less what Sather or Messier thought. He allowed Holik to speak? My guess he Messier dare not go near him and try and stop him or someone was gone.
Your guess? Oh gimme a break now. So now we've gone from "Messier controlled that lockeroom and intimidated everyone" to "Messier himself was intimidated and dared not go near Holik or say anything".

Again which one is it again? This is EXACTLY what i am pointing to when i say you're creating these catch-22's that cancel each other out. You've flip flopped so many times in this discussion we're starting to lose track of what you originally argued.


Quote:
And two of the three wanted no part of the New York Rangers. Barnaby went to a team worse off than the Rangers. Carl Lindros said plenty about the operation.
Actually on the contrary Barnaby was more than interested in coming back but couldnt get more money out of the Rangers. I believe the articles that said such could still be easily found in the newslinks at Ranger Fan Central.

And Carl Lindros made his comments AFTER his son's 9 million dollar option was declined. No, no bitterness there from the man who ran his son out of Philly. You ever think that maybe for a moment that he was a little upset his son was getting a cool 9 million for next season?

So when Lindros did it for money he obviously was the voice of reason {or rather his father was} but when Messier left Edmonton it was all about the money and greed. Doesn't that even slightly sound like a double standard?

But that's the biggest problem i have with the whole debate. It's a no-win situation for Messier, regardless of what he does or did or will do.

Edge is offline  
Old
07-25-2004, 12:33 AM
  #94
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
and again, youve shown nothing that Messier cannot do from behind the bench... give it up already...
Have you ever played hockey? Do you even understand the inherent gap that exists between a player and a coach as compared to a player with the captain.

They aren't one in the same. If you don't believe that then there is nothing i can tell you, it's one of simplest and most easily understood aspects of hockey.

Quote:
Youve shown nothing that suggests Messier will accept a proper role on the ice if he returns.... but hey as long as he knows how to order a nice steak he can skate as long as he likes eh?
And you've shown nothing to suggest he won't. In fact you haven't said much of anything....it's been all NYIsles1. You just chimed in with the occassional remark followed by one of HFBoards wide array of smiley faces.

I dunno It seems funny to me That you would have nothing to say in response to what i said Other then to dodge it and response with nothing to back it accept the cute faces.

Edge is offline  
Old
07-25-2004, 12:49 AM
  #95
Graveytrain
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 204
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
Have you ever played hockey? Do you even understand the inherent gap that exists between a player and a coach as compared to a player with the captain.

They aren't one in the same. If you don't believe that then there is nothing i can tell you, it's one of simplest and most easily understood aspects of hockey.



And you've shown nothing to suggest he won't. In fact you haven't said much of anything....it's been all NYIsles1. You just chimed in with the occassional remark followed by one of HFBoards wide array of smiley faces.

I dunno It seems funny to me That you would have nothing to say in response to what i said Other then to dodge it and response with nothing to back it accept the cute faces.

No, i dont even know what a puck looks like...

uh, maybe because you have said nothing? Except to suggest that we need someone to show a few kids around NY...You've avoided everything i have said regarding Mess's performance on the ice, where it counts... Suggesting " we dont need him to teach guys how to score" knowing full well that has nothing to do with it...

I can just picture Mess taking the kids aside and educating them on what it means to compete every night, be a Pro, ect.... while he loafs around the ice waiting for someone else to get the job done, Yeah, great example to set... I guess that is the definition of leadership for those who have played Hockey...

Graveytrain is offline  
Old
07-25-2004, 01:56 AM
  #96
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Gravey - Okay, I will reviews your posts in order.

Quote:
That was your first post. So in keeping with the language here goes.



Quote:
Mess doesn't just skip practices, he skips entire shifts... Even i could circle the net like a crow while my linemates are left to fend for themselves, often having to cover twice as much ice as they should... leaving them prone to make more mistakes, which usually get them in hot water...
Already answered it, but i'll do it again. If Messier did this and his teammates were doing nothing but cover for him how did he managed to all his assists?

Quote:
some people will just never learn...
Yup.

Quote:
and those 3 guys are no longer around, are they? Hopefully, neither will Mess...but if your looking for a statue to stand around while others do the dirty work, he's your man
Already addressed that point about a thousand times in the 4 pages i've written here but i'll do it again.

Messier wouldnt be here to carry the team even if that argument was correct. But playing devil's advocate and saying that others did the dirty work, they were also rewarded with some points as well.

But if we wanna go by that analogy why aren't we calling out the way Lindros played? The man who needed to be on Holik's right the past two years at various times to try and get something going?

Quote:
Off ice, you are right... if he wants to coach, or take a job within the Orginization thats fine... on ice he sets a terrible example... whether he scoops up garbage goals or not... i think it sets a bad example for any player to stand around and coast as much as Mess does while your linemates have to pick up the slack...Some think these flaws are worth the potential payoff, but i don't...luckily he was skating mostly with 2 tough veterans who probably knew what to expect, but whats going to happen when he's skating with 2 kids for months on end?
Actually weren't those tought guys wingers later moved in an effort to spark Lindros?

Didn't Messier also play with fourth line pluggers like Ortmeyer and Lacouture. I reaaaaaally don't think Mess took many scoring opporunities away from those two.

So Messier is at fault because the coach balances him out with defensive wingers? How is that any different that a coach trying to add some scoring wingers to Holik or trying to balance Lindros size by adding someone with speed in Rucinsky. Or how is that any different then trying to pair a defensive defensemen with Poti?

That's the whole point, to try and balance a line out. Obviously you're not gonna put scoring wingers with Messier. But that is also a two way story in of itself then. If he wasn't with scoring wingers so that his defensive shortcomings we covered, that makes it even more impressive that he actually got 18 goals and 40 points. So either way, some credit has to be due there.

Quote:
Edge:

i dont think that is a certainty anymore... If Mess is seen an aging player loafing around to play 16 soft minutes so he can pad his numbers, rather then 9 or 10 solid mins these guys will take notice...at least i hope they would... now im not talking in a physical sense, like taking the body, but mess barely competes for a loose puck anymore, and that is a problem
And my response to that was in several places throughout the moutains of response i've written on the subject.

Quote:
Rather have a guy who gets a little more involved even though they might make mistakes... These youngsters will respect hard work, not someone who helps carry a couch
The youngsters will also respect a guy who has managed to play in the league for three decades and managed to finish second only to Gretzky in points while going on to win six stanley cups.

I think those attributes are much higher in value than whether Messier can physically steamroll a guy at 43.

If that were the case and they wouldn't respect Messier for that, what makes you think they'd respond to Jagr's approach or Holik talking to the media?

Quote:
Messier can do all those things from behind the bench....But in the end, his selfishness will rule the day, as always
What exactly do you want me to respond to here. Are we to engage in a childish "No he isn't" "yes he is" No he isnt" routine?

What counterpoint do you want to me to restate that i havent done 80 times already in this thread to a more detailed opinion by NYIsles?

Quote:
We said goodbye and paid him his due respect, enough already....If this Orginization can't find someone else to teach a few kids to keep their head up when the Media starts barking then we're in worse shape then we think....
Yes, we ARE.

Quote:
What's next, he's going to tuck Murray in before nap time? Tie his skates?
What would you like to say to this exactly that i didn say with my Graves remarks.

The guy you have as screen name worshipped him. I think that would really be funny, you arguing that point to the guys who's nickname you used. He'd probably be saying the same thing as me. Something tells me afterwards your screen name would be changing.

Quote:
Are you serious? he's 43.... this is beyond comical
Already responded.

Quote:
you have to let go sometime... if not now when, at age 47, 53, when?

We are the joke of the league not just for our record, but the way this team is run...

Poti, Kasparaitus, Dunham aren't million dollar disasters?.... I still don't put it past Slats to sign another player in this mold... This season is about winning as much as the last 7 have been....
Ditto on the response.

Quote:
I can't believe we need a 43 year selfish SOB to tell a few kids what to eat and when to sleep... that is pretty funny
and again, youve shown nothing that Messier cannot do from behind the bench... give it up already...Youve shown nothing that suggests Messier will accept a proper role on the ice if he returns.... but hey as long as he knows how to order a nice steak he can skate as long as he likes eh?

Already argued this point without having to resort to assumptions that someone is selfish or calling them a SOB.


Quote:
No, i dont even know what a puck looks like...
No comment.

Quote:
uh, maybe because you have said nothing? Except to suggest that we need someone to show a few kids around NY...You've avoided everything i have said regarding Mess's performance on the ice, where it counts... Suggesting " we dont need him to teach guys how to score" knowing full well that has nothing to do with it...
I've now gone through all you had to say twice...... or i am supposed to be treating this like running laps?

Quote:
I can just picture Mess taking the kids aside and educating them on what it means to compete every night, be a Pro, ect.... while he loafs around the ice waiting for someone else to get the job done, Yeah, great example to set... I guess that is the definition of leadership for those who have played Hockey...
I already answered with the response that he isnt there to teach them to PLAY hockey. I already answered this question i believe twice.

But lemme ask a question for you then. If I am saying i dont want him teaching them to play because that is a coach's job, and you're saying to make him an assitant doesn't that kind of contradict itself there?

There we've now gone through this cycle twice. I also conviently left off the nine million facial reactions for everyone's reading enjoyment.

You tell me what questions YOU want me to answer and i'll be happy to answer them a third time....or a fourth or however many times you wanna ask em till a mod comes in and has pity on these poor readers who are now sitting through 7 pages of this stuff.

Edge is offline  
Old
07-25-2004, 02:26 AM
  #97
Graveytrain
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 204
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
I've now gone through all you had to say twice...... or i am supposed to be treating this like running laps?

I already answered with the response that he isnt there to teach them to PLAY hockey. I already answered this question i believe twice.

But lemme ask a question for you then. If I am saying i dont want him teaching them to play because that is a coach's job, and you're saying to make him an assitant doesn't that kind of contradict itself there?

There we've now gone through this cycle twice. I also conviently left off the nine million facial reactions for everyone's reading enjoyment.

You tell me what questions YOU want me to answer and i'll be happy to answer them a third time....or a fourth or however many times you wanna ask em till a mod comes in and has pity on these poor readers who are now sitting through 7 pages of this stuff.
I could say the same about you... who cares how many pages it takes up, most of my posts are quick and to the point, whether you have the capacity to understand them is another issue....

I will leave out most of your repsone in an attempt to save space, but will try to summarize.

Again, this has nothing to do with Graves, or Ortmeyer or Murray or Lindros or anybody else, no matter how much you would like it to be... which is what ive been trying to convey for 2 days....This isn't about balancing lines, or some winger being rewarded with a few points....It's about Messier and what his mere presence in a uniform represents, not only to the players on the roster, but those in the entire Originization, and yes the fans as well...

I just dont understand how the good things Adam Graves would have to say about Messier from 10-12 years ago and the positive effect he had or how much he worshipped him has any bearing on today.

I dont know if youve got the impression that i disagree with your assessment that Mess can do wonder for these kids off the ice, i don't... But like you say i still haven't seen in this 7 page mountain what is to be gained but Mess putting on the Uniform... IMO his lackluster, albeit witty game detracts from those intangables he can still offer. Maybe i expect too much from a 43 year old, but shouldn't every player have to battle for something? It isn't an excuse to say " look at this guy, " why dont you criticize him " most if not all of those guys are gone so whats the point...

So if you wanna insult me, go right ahead.... if my 2 paragraph posts are too much for you, im sorry... and ill leave out any cute faces as to not offend you master


Last edited by Graveytrain: 07-25-2004 at 02:42 AM.
Graveytrain is offline  
Old
07-25-2004, 02:51 AM
  #98
Danny Clark
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 307
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
Jeez, you gotta be kidding. Ya know how hard is to find some articles from two years on the vast, unkept library that is the internet?

Here is one that touch's on it {i searched for 30 minutes reading through all kinds of articles many of whom now have dead links}.

http://www.sportsline.com/b/page/pre...7535%2C00.html

But lemme give a summary of what the BIG concerns were, many of which were overlooked while everyone was hyping Trottier as the right choice.

He coached the Portland Pirates for one season but evidently lost interest in doing the day in and day out job of training and planning for the role. Needless to say he quit right after the playoffs and moved back into an assitant role, this time with the Avs.

There was also more than few whiphers that for all the well wishes colorado gave that they were a little....shall we say a little "too" willing to go ahead and let him go.

If you're looking for the articles i'm sorry but your gonna have to do that yourself, i'm just too busy with this senator stuff to look more articles about my team that you somehow missed from a few years back.



There were A LOT of people who said the hiring was a bit odd and that though they "thought" he would be a very good coach, there was no way to really tell yet because his only other head coaching experience was a .500 effort for a season in Portland. See a pattern here with all these coaches who are hovering around .500 with their previous efforts?



And the stories about him lifting players up are also legendary but once AGAIN you fail to address that at all. In fact whenever i mention it, you skirt away to something.

You're the one giving the tangible evidence? Um you were the one who couldn't even go to hockeydb.com to check coaching records or check the storyline for the games you claimed changed the seasons. You also failed to produce anything other than your opinion to back the islander claim up. The links you did post i pointed out key points you missed while providing them. Points that actually contradicted the points you were trying to make.

So that's doing the research? Offering your opinion while asking me to find articles you somehow can never remember and asking me to scour the internet to find them for you isn't doing research. it's making someone else double check things for you.

For someone who did his hw, as you claim you haven't actually addressed the corrections i made about your claims in this thread. You've just tried going a different direction.....several times until we've done a complete circle. And we'll do it again, which at this point i have no problem with.



But you clearly are a little bit more out of your element with the rangers here.



McCarthy didn't say anything about Messier, he said he wondered why he wasn't resigned. How did you get your claim from THAT???? Considering the fact that he and Messier were also pretty close would actually still contradict any claim you could make about Messier running him out of town.

McCarthy's most vocal comments were about the fans who boo'd him during a preseason game.

Despite all that the Rangers STILL brought him back off waivers despite the fact his career was about as dead as a doornail. So that still don't get what points you were attempting to make with that.

Oh Kovalev made a comment about not working for? Hmm a guy with 13 goals and a disappointing season commenting about guys working for things. But that makes sense, his season certainly makes him a credible source on the futility of effort and the lack of success as a result.



But yet you attempted to use McCarthy as an example before and his career is just about as done {if not more} than Graves was. So which one is it?



You're right the only problems were that A. At the time the Rangers were actually the more successful franchise and B. The signing of Messier had NOTHING to do with the knicks. They were actually turning a nice profit on both at the time.

It wasn't a business decision in the sense of "we only have the money to keep one, so we went with the team with the higher market share".

That point becomes even more enhances by the even larger amounts of money the team spent afterwards getting players for the Rangers.



How is it assumption, i worked for the dang franchise for the better part of 5 years. I work in the industry and am around it 24/7. Though I'm not directly linked to the franchise anymore, you can darn well bet i am around them a lot. Often times more than i would like to be.

If you know what you've read why couldn't you even pick out the points that totally contradicted what you said?



The debate isn't whether a team has hero's so much do you really think those guys would have been kept over guys who were coming from say, the Habs dynasty? No they wouldn't and thus the Canucks went with the guy they felt came from the better pedigree. But again we're getting sidetracked by the fact that it was on them, not Messier.




Wasn't that also the same story that Gretzky cleared up by saying his wife was in town?



He had his coach? But didn't you just say in an earlier post that he had something against Renney and was simply keeping his mouth shut on the issue.

Again were flip flopping, which one is it?

He was virtually invisible? If he was then what the heck were kovalev, lindros and nedved? Forget invisible, they were non-existent.

For someone who was "virtually" invisible he still had more goals than those young core guys who we've also established got more icetime.




But for the 901st time, he isn't supposed to be an impact player. You keep ignoring that when i say it and you refuse to address it. HE - WAS - NOT- ASKED - TO- BE - THE - IMPACT- PLAYER. The others guys who we can't even say were "virtually invisible were". Every point he had was-seen-as-a-bonus.



Taking whose minutes?!?!?! I just got done showing you he got less minutes than them.

Again you claim earlier you do your research and this and that, yet you can't even read the simple numbers i JUST put in front of you.

Where did he rank amonst centers icetime? THIRD. How many years in a row? TWO and possibly three.

And WHOSE icetime did he take away? You keep saying them, but they got more icetime than him at the same position. So WHOSE did he take away?



Alright i am once again gonna call you out out on the numbers with the icetime

In that game Nedved and Lindros BOTH got more icetime than him at the center position {20 mins for Petr and over 16 for Lindros}. Holik got 12:23 but also spent 6 minutes in the penalty box.

Messier got a whopping total of.....14:51 seconds good enough to rank a whopping fifth amongst forwards. He likely gets pushed to sixth if Kovalev also doesnt spent 4 minutes in the box {for his minus 2 performance he got all of 30 seconds less time} and probably seventh if Holik doesn't sit for 6 minutes including a double minor for high sticking and a lazy hooking penalty in the first that if Messier did you'd be screaming bloody murder.

So do we wanna try a fourth game now or are we at least willing to admit that the though Messier isn't perfect he isn't exactly a landmine on skates either. I think you can at least see that.



So tell me, who do you throw out there with Holik in the box, with Nedved already at 20 minutes and Lindros himself again not to far removed from coming back from injury.

If the question was meant as a seasonal remark, than we still have to ask ourselves how he got the time in the first. Which in a circular like pattern takes us right back to the play of Nedved and the other centers. Who whether they got 20 minutes of 16, couldn't seem to do a darn thing with it.

But see now that we've proven the icetime and gamelog theories to be false we're already starting to shift the claim to a new area to see if that might stick.



So in the same breath he was overbearing and yet they were lost without him. Here we go again.......




Well here's a good reason, BECAUSE THEY SWITCHED HIM TO RIGHT WINg IN HARTFORD!

The reason because he wasn't cutting it as a center against AHL talent and actually showed life after being moved to the right side.

In fact up until the end of the season, his future seemed almost destined to be a winger and not a center.

Thirdly he clicked on Holik's right but guess who took his spots? No it wasn't Messier {lets end that theory before it starts} it was Lindros and Carter and whoever else needed a "jump" in their game.

Then Lundmark was somehow switched BACK to center where he didn't do as good yet again. Because somehow this team thought that a guy who struggled as a center at the AHL level, would somehow be able to do it at the NHL level.



No a guy who anytime in his career couldn't do jack without Weight or Smyth on the first line is scary.

A guy who couldn't do a thing on the ice was scary. A guy who continued to do nothing in Washington is scary.

A guy who continued to do nothing afterwards in LA is scary.

A guy who wasn't even qualified in LA is scary. A guy who is now sitting at home as a UFA is scary.

A guy who probably will have to go back to a pumb assignment playing with Smyth again to put anything remotely close to his number is.....you guessed it, scary.




But you've once again totally ingnored the comments about the players in that article. See you're again steering away from it......




And again, WHY was he in the neighborhood. What have discussed for the better part of two days now with ya?

And so now the next thing to throw at the wall is something with such concrete proof as "too bad they don't have a stat that proves this?"

What next? I mean sheesh this is getting insane now.....




From so many? Lol you're the only way making even the remotest of cases. Saying "he's an old greedy sob" isn't a point, it's an almost teenage stick your tongue out and out your hands in your ears routine.

Actually what IS getting to me is the fact that you haven't produced one shred of anything that has proof behind it and you haven't addressed one bounce back question.

You're ignoring what your own articles said, your getting records confused, your conviently forgetting game logs, you're claiming to do research yet not actually looking up simple stats and facts on as simple of a site as espn.com

I mean i'm actually finding this quite amusing if for nothing else that as far as a case goes, you've pretty much got nothing and you know it. That's one reason why on this issue i just keep posting because the further we've gotten down this thread the more desperate the attempts have been to paint the picture that we are increasingly seeing is not the one you first tried to make it out to be.

If i was getting annoyed or it was getting to me, i wouldnt be wasting my time on the issue. Instead i'm actually finding reasons to post again on what is usually a down time in the year.



Sure ya would because you'd be fishing like you were now. There'd be some obscure thing to throw out there that would easily be disproved by the actual evidence and it still wouldn't be enough.

I mean we both know we disagree on the issue, but we also both know that people are reading this thread who aren't posting {or really dont care and who can blame em} and I'm just trying to show that this situation {much like anything else in life} is not as one sided as some will try to make it nor can it be summed up with comments that are barely above the level of saying "He sucks because he's bald....bald people suck....".

For me, this is just another day at the office.



Did he or did you just not want to comment on the icetime he was getting in his last {and most highly ineffective} last season where he got icetime over a 27 year old Nedved, and two talented, developing young centers named Malhotra and Savard {not to mention a kid named Dube' in the system at the time who wasnt beyond the realm of a callup}.

But see that's the no win situation we've created here. Gretzky plays ahead of legit talented young centers like Nedved, Savard and Malhotra you dont mention it. Yet when Messier plays behind thirty somethings like Nedved, Holik and {likely an injury free} Lindros it's a different story.

If you also remember that time period you also remember that people on here were wanting to see Savard and Malhotra play more and then i wouldn't call them "Happy" when Gretz got hurt, they were sure excited to see a 1-2-3 comination of Nedved-Savard-Malhotra.




First of all that is exactly what you're doing, look at the amount of flip-flops and new attempts you've taken since the first post.



Second of all you still haven't even touched by remark about the core players stepping up.



Third of all i am sure that once again those were the only ones you payed attention to right?



Fourth of all Gretzky's infamous comment was "If I would have known Mark would leave, I never would have signed here". So we'll let that one float around for a little bit okay.

If you'd like I could even give you the book, page number and source of where he was quoted as saying that.

Lastly, when Gretz had retired this team had missed the playoffs for two years....a far cry from the 7 they are currently at.

For the same reason why if Mark would have played his last campaign in 2002 the bitterness of fans towards anything associated with this titanic disaster of a team would have been mellowed.



How is that a parting shot? That's like me saying "We need to get more reasonable posters in here at hockeysfutue" and that somehow being used in an argument that i was 'mocking people's beliefs'?




Your guess? Oh gimme a break now. So now we've gone from "Messier controlled that lockeroom and intimidated everyone" to "Messier himself was intimidated and dared not go near Holik or say anything".

Again which one is it again? This is EXACTLY what i am pointing to when i say you're creating these catch-22's that cancel each other out. You've flip flopped so many times in this discussion we're starting to lose track of what you originally argued.




Actually on the contrary Barnaby was more than interested in coming back but couldnt get more money out of the Rangers. I believe the articles that said such could still be easily found in the newslinks at Ranger Fan Central.

And Carl Lindros made his comments AFTER his son's 9 million dollar option was declined. No, no bitterness there from the man who ran his son out of Philly. You ever think that maybe for a moment that he was a little upset his son was getting a cool 9 million for next season?

So when Lindros did it for money he obviously was the voice of reason {or rather his father was} but when Messier left Edmonton it was all about the money and greed. Doesn't that even slightly sound like a double standard?

But that's the biggest problem i have with the whole debate. It's a no-win situation for Messier, regardless of what he does or did or will do.
Holy ****....all this to defend a 43 year old player?

I can understand sentimental reasons for this guy getting a spot, although I'm not a sentimental type guy... but when 345 paragraphs come out giving argument of some sort of usefulness, I'm entertained.

Danny Clark is offline  
Old
07-25-2004, 03:11 AM
  #99
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
I could say the same about you... who cares how many pages it takes up, most of my posts are quick and to the point, whether you have the capacity to understand them is another issue....
Yeah that's obviously it. I guess i am just having a hard time keeping up with all the smiles faces......

{Sigh} I guess you're just too darn swift for simple country folk like {snaps fingers} awww shucks.


Quote:
Again, this has nothing to do with Graves, or Ortmeyer or Murray or Lindros or anybody else, no matter how much you would like it to be... which is what ive been trying to convey for 2 days....This isn't about balancing lines, or some winger being rewarded with a few points....It's about Messier and what his mere presence in a uniform represents, not only to the players on the roster, but those in the entire Originization, and yes the fans as well...

I understand that, but when you say he is a SOB who takes up minutes and forces other kids than we obviously have to go the history books to draw examples now don't we?

And it has EVERYTHING to do with guys like Murray and Ortmeyer who LIKE Graves have strong leadership skills and who LIKE Graves could feed off the personality of Messier.

Murray from a personality standpoint is VERY similar to Graves. He's not nearly the player Graves was nor do I think he ever will be, but like Graves he is a heart and soul player with strong leadership qualities and could quite possibly be the future captain of this team.

Like Graves he is young and in NYC and could learn a lot about certain things just LIKE Graves did.

That's why those names are mentioned, it's not just because i feel like typing them.

Quote:
I just dont understand how the good things Adam Graves would have to say about Messier from 10-12 years ago and the positive effect he had or how much he worshipped him has any bearing on today.
You're right because Graves has nothing positive to say about him today......

What is HAS to do with is the nuturing of young leadership and a sort of passing the torch so to speak. IF Messier came back {and that is a big IF for all the pages this god forsaken thread has taken up} it would be the ideal situation to transfer the past leadership to the future leadership {because i don't believe Holik and Jagr represent the future leadership of this team}. Guys like Ormeyer and Lampman guys who could also be leaders on this team will also benefit from little tidbits here and there.

God knows that IF Messier actually came back for next year there is no way for him to "lead" this team into the playoffs as some people might believe he can't control himself on.

What Messier WOULD be doing is exactly WHAT he did at the end of last season with those kids. That could become even better if say the schedule is only 40 or so games.

Quote:
I dont know if youve got the impression that i disagree with your assessment that Mess can do wonder for these kids off the ice, i don't... But like you say i still haven't seen in this 7 page mountain what is to be gained but Mess putting on the Uniform...
What will be gained will not be measured by goals, assists, plus minuses or even a playoff birth this year. What will be gained is these kids understanding what was talked about after a game. What will be gained is not having what we saw so many guys come in here and do, make @$$es out of themselves on the ice. No chicken dances, understanding how their own careers are similar to those who have come before and gone on to better things.

What messier would bring would be seen in several years when what the current crop of kids regurgitate back to the next wave {The Prucha's, the Korpikoski's, the Graham's possibly} from those kids who were around to learn it. From the Murray's, from the Lampman's, from the Ortmeyer's, from the Tyutin's.

THAT is what THEY will get and thats what all of this is about, THEM.

Quote:
IMO his lackluster, albeit witty game detracts from those intangables he can still offer. Maybe i expect too much from a 43 year old, but shouldn't every player have to battle for something? It isn't an excuse to say " look at this guy, " why dont you criticize him " most if not all of those guys are gone so whats the point...
The point is that Messier wasn't expected to carry this team, what is the point is that for all the complaining he still TRIED. He's not a stupid man, anyone who has met him knows that. He knows as much as anyone he doesn't have what he once had, but he still gave a solid effort for a 43 year old.

The point is that A. I don't think we have enough people to fill this roster and B. If we are going to sign a Vet to come in here and fill out the roster and have these kids look to as a veteran leader, than WHY not Messier? This is going to sign free agents of the B and mostly c rate kind, so why have Messier do it. This team isn't making the playoffs. We're not trying to rebuild with a new group of vets or players who are coming in their prime. We are talking about adding players in their VERY early 20's and simply not having enough of them to spread around at the NHL level.

So all things being equal and knowing this team WILL add some veteran forwards for the short term, why not keep the captain a guy who despite what some of us might say has the attention and admiration of the kids who grew up watching them.

I really do believe that Messier could be a great guy to have around them. He's not their to train them, he's there to be {in many ways} almost an on-ice father figure.

Quote:
So if you wanna insult me, go right ahead.... if my 2 paragraph posts are too much for you, im sorry... and ill leave out any cute faces as to not offend you master
I'm insulting you? You're the one making all the smart ass remarks, saying someone isn't capable of understanding your intellect and passing stupid comments like "He can Murray in" and "I don't even know what a puck looks like". The insults at you are coming from yourself, not me.

I don't honestly know or frankly care enough about you to insult over some stupid message board conversation. If you take it as an insult than you take it as insult, there's nothing i can do about that. And I'm not gonna apologize for something i have no control over.


Last edited by Edge: 07-25-2004 at 03:15 AM.
Edge is offline  
Old
07-25-2004, 03:14 AM
  #100
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danny Clark
Holy ****....all this to defend a 43 year old player?

I can understand sentimental reasons for this guy getting a spot, although I'm not a sentimental type guy... but when 345 paragraphs come out giving argument of some sort of usefulness, I'm entertained.

Happens every time NYIsles and I end up in the same thread at the same time.....that's why we have a running joke about doing a talk show.

It also just one of those topics where you just sit there and here enough ubsurd comments to finally get up present an opposing view, regardless of the length. But unfortunatly now it's starting to degrade into figures of speeches, and people making insults out of nothing and all this other garbage which is unfortunate.

I think NYIsles and I are doing our best trial lawyer inpersonations over here which is kind of ironic because I'll be getting my degree in about..oh, 1 year.

Edge is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:40 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.