HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

sather dont seem to make the right choices... on anything

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-24-2004, 01:57 AM
  #1
little a from da bx
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 375
vCash: 500
sather dont seem to make the right choices... on anything

the whole point is me just thinking about things... sather chose:

malakhov over schneider

poti over berard

both bad choices and worng choices to begin with. i always like schneider , cant belive he let hiom go over malakhov, and berard is consistent and defensively opk more than poti atleast and berard plays a nsty game when neccessary, so now since thjose 2 coices were wonrg on his part, i think malioney did the draft this year and renney the year b4 , ok, but with everything sather decides on, if he cant make right choices on picking defenseman out, who knows what he is doing to this system, that means everyting in general.. traded york basically for poti, unbelievable, loved york a true nyr played with heart and sould... then dvo for carter who was 100 times worse than dvo and dvo onlyu had one bad year and sather moved him quickly, its amazing....

little a from da bx is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 02:39 AM
  #2
BDubinskyNYR17*
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: New York
Posts: 10,761
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to BDubinskyNYR17*
Quote:
Originally Posted by little a from da bx
the whole point is me just thinking about things... sather chose:

malakhov over schneider

poti over berard

both bad choices and worng choices to begin with. i always like schneider , cant belive he let hiom go over malakhov, and berard is consistent and defensively opk more than poti atleast and berard plays a nsty game when neccessary, so now since thjose 2 coices were wonrg on his part, i think malioney did the draft this year and renney the year b4 , ok, but with everything sather decides on, if he cant make right choices on picking defenseman out, who knows what he is doing to this system, that means everyting in general.. traded york basically for poti, unbelievable, loved york a true nyr played with heart and sould... then dvo for carter who was 100 times worse than dvo and dvo onlyu had one bad year and sather moved him quickly, its amazing....
yea and neither of them are from Edmonton. So I guess that is why Lundmark lasted so long. Imagine if York was from Edmonton. He would still be on this team I bet. A fool would tell u that Mike York for Poti is robbery by Oilers.

BDubinskyNYR17* is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 02:54 AM
  #3
CoolDude*
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Country: United States
Posts: 379
vCash: 500
and how good were the angers when they had Berard and Schneider?? oh yeah.. about the same as now

CoolDude* is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 03:14 AM
  #4
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Tromelin
Posts: 9,559
vCash: 500
hindsight is 20/20. the rangers didn't trade away any future superstars. some nice players were traded but at this point i'm happy this team is rebuilding. would mike york or brian berard make any differance the past few years?

Son of Steinbrenner is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 10:26 AM
  #5
Onion Boy
Registered User
 
Onion Boy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: Japan
Posts: 2,678
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Steinbrenner
would mike york or brian berard make any differance the past few years?
No, but it might've made a difference for the next few.

Onion Boy is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 10:30 AM
  #6
thrill89
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 32
vCash: 500
Both average

Schneider and Berard with the rangers were average. Even today and also back then they do not fit into future of the rangers. Sather took a risk with Malakov and Poti, it did not work. It would have not work with Berard and Schneider. I would argue that they both especially schneider took many unnecessary penalties[high sticking] and was not physical to stop anyone from ramming into the goalie.

thrill89 is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 11:09 AM
  #7
drewcon40
Registered User
 
drewcon40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: born LI, live SI
Posts: 844
vCash: 500
Signing Malakhov and letting Schneider walk was just Sather making a change for the sake of making a change. That was, I believe, his first transaction of his tenure as GM. This move was made even before the Messier resigning and Low hiring. Schneider was one of our better defenseman from the previous season. Malakhov played 1 or 2 games in 2000-01.

Mike York for Tom Poti - UGH! Why? Berard had come such a long way from the beginning of the season. Why was Sather so hel bent on trading York? He almost had a deal with Washington for a Grier, Witt package in March 2001 (according to Carpinello's book Nightmare on 33rd Street). When the Bure deal was being rumored, Mike York's name was always being mentioned. When we got Bure without giving York up, I was so relieved. The next day, we get Poti-licious and Rem Murray for York. I remember rumors that Sather struck that deal to block the Islanders from landing Poti. I think Isbister + for Poti was the rumored deal.

drewcon40 is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 11:41 AM
  #8
BDubinskyNYR17*
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: New York
Posts: 10,761
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to BDubinskyNYR17*
Quote:
Originally Posted by little a from da bx
the whole point is me just thinking about things... sather chose:

malakhov over schneider

poti over berard

both bad choices and worng choices to begin with. i always like schneider , cant belive he let hiom go over malakhov, and berard is consistent and defensively opk more than poti atleast and berard plays a nsty game when neccessary, so now since thjose 2 coices were wonrg on his part, i think malioney did the draft this year and renney the year b4 , ok, but with everything sather decides on, if he cant make right choices on picking defenseman out, who knows what he is doing to this system, that means everyting in general.. traded york basically for poti, unbelievable, loved york a true nyr played with heart and sould... then dvo for carter who was 100 times worse than dvo and dvo onlyu had one bad year and sather moved him quickly, its amazing....
Brian Trottier over Ken Hitchcock, Ron Low over anyone.

BDubinskyNYR17* is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 11:46 AM
  #9
little a from da bx
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 375
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjb3599
No, but it might've made a difference for the next few.
yeah berard and york would have been better to me than carter and poti, and im sure everyobne else

little a from da bx is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 12:19 PM
  #10
Kovalev27
BEST IN THE WORLD
 
Kovalev27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 2,076
vCash: 500
dont cry over bryan berard, he was awful for us, and with one eye who knew he'd be able to turn it around. i won't blame sather for that one. also today your crying over the carter trade but when sather made it, it was considered a damn good trade. NO ONE knew carter would just stop playing, if carter had continued to play as he had this trade would have been a STEAL. on to matt schneider. there is a reason he's been moved so frequently lets leave it at that. also anyone who says they did'nt like the malakhov signing at the time is lieing. the only bad deal sather has made is the poti deal and as much as we all love mike york his 14 goals a year or so can be replaced. not to mention his consistent drop off at midseason. he's also now becoming more and more injury prone. his style although very popular among fans is not good for his body. poti on a good defensive team can be very valuable. we're just not a good defensive team. obviously you can argue the lindros trade was a bad one but if only jonsson turned into anything worthwhile. and at that time if you look back you take lindros over jonsson any day imo. he just couldn't stay healthy.

Kovalev27 is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 12:48 PM
  #11
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Tromelin
Posts: 9,559
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjb3599
No, but it might've made a difference for the next few.
how? are the rangers to the only team to make bad trades. Isn't Berard over 30 and blind in one eye? i don't rememember berard playing that good here.

Son of Steinbrenner is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 01:13 PM
  #12
Onion Boy
Registered User
 
Onion Boy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: Japan
Posts: 2,678
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Steinbrenner
how? are the rangers to the only team to make bad trades. Isn't Berard over 30 and blind in one eye? i don't rememember berard playing that good here.
He played fine here, better in Boston, and phenomenal in Chicago. Also, how would it make a difference in the future? Well for starters, if we had York we wouldn't be putting Lundmark at second line center and if we had Berard we'd have no need for a PP QB in Poti which would facilitate the York tradeoff.

Onion Boy is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 01:24 PM
  #13
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Tromelin
Posts: 9,559
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjb3599
He played fine here, better in Boston, and phenomenal in Chicago. Also, how would it make a difference in the future? Well for starters, if we had York we wouldn't be putting Lundmark at second line center and if we had Berard we'd have no need for a PP QB in Poti which would facilitate the York tradeoff.
again hindsight is 20/20 name a gm in any sport that has a perfect record when it comes to trades? Berard sucked here and i could care less how he did in chicago. isn't chicago worse than the rangers at this point? the poti for york deal was a great trade at the time. has mike york been healthy for a full season yet? mike york might be the worst second half player in hockey. listen i can't defend poti but its not like the rangers traded a young mark messier for poti. injuries are going to follow york throughout his career just look at the past few years. if poti ever plays to his potential the york trade will be a steal for the rangers.

Son of Steinbrenner is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 01:24 PM
  #14
drewcon40
Registered User
 
drewcon40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: born LI, live SI
Posts: 844
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kovalev27
Also anyone who says they did'nt like the malakhov signing at the time is lieing.
No one liked the Malakhov deal. Slats was ripped on many message boards. The popular opinion was that this was a step down from Schneider who loved being here. Malakhov just won the cup with New Jersey but wasn't there a skiing incident in Montreal with his knee??

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kovalev27
and at that time if you look back you take lindros over jonsson any day imo. he just couldn't stay healthy.
I do not know or remember one Ranger fan who was for this trade. "he just couldn't stay healthy" is such an understatement. Fans were outraged. That trade was officially announced August 20. There was week or so where it was just a rumor and no one wanted Lindros. He was already 7 concussions in.

drewcon40 is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 01:28 PM
  #15
drewcon40
Registered User
 
drewcon40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: born LI, live SI
Posts: 844
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Steinbrenner
how? are the rangers to the only team to make bad trades. Isn't Berard over 30 and blind in one eye? i don't rememember berard playing that good here.
Brian Berard's birthday 03/05/77
Tom Poti's birthday 03/22/77

drewcon40 is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 01:39 PM
  #16
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Tromelin
Posts: 9,559
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by drewcon40
Brian Berard's birthday 03/05/77
Tom Poti's birthday 03/22/77

who cares! berard sucked with the rangers. if boston thought he was great why didn't they resign him? poti has more potential than berard.

Son of Steinbrenner is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 02:11 PM
  #17
drewcon40
Registered User
 
drewcon40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: born LI, live SI
Posts: 844
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Steinbrenner
who cares! berard sucked with the rangers. if boston thought he was great why didn't they resign him? poti has more potential than berard.
Boston also didn't sign Bill Guerin in 2002 or Brian Rolson this summer?

Does Rolston "suck"? Did Guerin "suck" then. I respect your opinion regarding Berard but at 27, what is this "potential" nonsense? When is Poti going to reach his potential? At 33 years old?

The argument is that Berard would have been just as effective as Poti so why not keep Berard (probably at a cheaper rate) and now you have Mike York as well. York would have probably been in the Dunham trade, the following year anyway

drewcon40 is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 07:12 PM
  #18
BobMarleyNYR
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Alphabet
Country: Iraq
Posts: 2,986
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to BobMarleyNYR
Quote:
Originally Posted by little a from da bx
the whole point is me just thinking about things... sather chose:

malakhov over schneider

poti over berard

both bad choices and worng choices to begin with. i always like schneider , cant belive he let hiom go over malakhov, and berard is consistent and defensively opk more than poti atleast and berard plays a nsty game when neccessary, so now since thjose 2 coices were wonrg on his part, i think malioney did the draft this year and renney the year b4 , ok, but with everything sather decides on, if he cant make right choices on picking defenseman out, who knows what he is doing to this system, that means everyting in general.. traded york basically for poti, unbelievable, loved york a true nyr played with heart and sould... then dvo for carter who was 100 times worse than dvo and dvo onlyu had one bad year and sather moved him quickly, its amazing....
You win the '04 Nonsensical Poster award... Just barely edged me!

BobMarleyNYR is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 08:00 PM
  #19
rnyquist
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 646
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by drewcon40
Boston also didn't sign Bill Guerin in 2002 or Brian Rolson this summer?

Does Rolston "suck"? Did Guerin "suck" then. I respect your opinion regarding Berard but at 27, what is this "potential" nonsense? When is Poti going to reach his potential? At 33 years old?

The argument is that Berard would have been just as effective as Poti so why not keep Berard (probably at a cheaper rate) and now you have Mike York as well. York would have probably been in the Dunham trade, the following year anyway

its one thing to try and sign someone and then get beat by someone, another thing to WALK AWAY from an arbitration award.

rnyquist is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 11:29 PM
  #20
little a from da bx
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 375
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by drewcon40
Brian Berard's birthday 03/05/77
Tom Poti's birthday 03/22/77
thank u drew, damn people should know what there talking about if they are gonna post.....son of stein, ring a bell, over 30 damn, i think any hockey fan knew berard was lik26 or 27, obviousley he is 27 though...

little a from da bx is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 11:36 PM
  #21
little a from da bx
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 375
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by drewcon40
No one liked the Malakhov deal. Slats was ripped on many message boards. The popular opinion was that this was a step down from Schneider who loved being here. Malakhov just won the cup with New Jersey but wasn't there a skiing incident in Montreal with his knee??



I do not know or remember one Ranger fan who was for this trade. "he just couldn't stay healthy" is such an understatement. Fans were outraged. That trade was officially announced August 20. There was week or so where it was just a rumor and no one wanted Lindros. He was already 7 concussions in.
must say drew i respect your posts thats 2 in a row.. son and kovalev, kovalev poster talked like he is the ultimate rangers commentator. put these unknowledgable fools in check man

little a from da bx is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 11:50 PM
  #22
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Tromelin
Posts: 9,559
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by little a from da bx
thank u drew, damn people should know what there talking about if they are gonna post.....son of stein, ring a bell, over 30 damn, i think any hockey fan knew berard was lik26 or 27, obviousley he is 27 though...
what are you kidding you want to talk about posting here are some gems from your past

Quote:
Originally Posted by little a from da bx
well to me its not an arguement its a discussion, that u felt b4 as u said know one can have an intelligent conversation, now that i am telling u that i disagree with on a majority of what u say this turns into an argument.. well for me no for u i guess so and could care less.. but no ortmeyer and murray are not expected to put up #s like lundmark is so ofcourse its less pressure on them guys especially with the type of players they are , total opposite from lundmark.... yeah they would be nervous with jagr and leetch.. but u dont seem to get my point, messiers presence is far more intimidating than any one elses. and thats no argument,.. the guy nees to retire and we should see out of our youth who will step up.... its time to move on messier and edge
how old are you? dude 3rd grade is a little harder than second grade :lol

Quote:
Originally Posted by little a from da bx
captain and assistants should be swirched monthly similar to what minnesota does-

want to know who will be the future captain of this team and with the way it looks no doubt in my mind

garth murray
is swirched a word in the english language? :lol


[QUOTE=little a from da bx]im sorry but, for first off

" the fact of the matter is, i could care less what the rangers do' - obviousley nopt casue all u do is knowck them and reply to posts thats not even made to u.

QUOTE]

this is actually a pretty long post you had. man was it funny. dude i don't read your posts for content (that would be stupid) i read them for a good laugh. i'm sure others feel the same :lol

Son of Steinbrenner is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 11:51 PM
  #23
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Tromelin
Posts: 9,559
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by little a from da bx
thank u drew, damn people should know what there talking about if they are gonna post.....son of stein, ring a bell, over 30 damn, i think any hockey fan knew berard was lik26 or 27, obviousley he is 27 though...
perhaps i thought berard was 30 because he has played for so long. it doesn't matter letting him go was a good move. trading york wasn't a good move but if poti ever put all his talent together the trade would be a steal

Son of Steinbrenner is offline  
Old
07-25-2004, 12:14 AM
  #24
BobMarleyNYR
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Alphabet
Country: Iraq
Posts: 2,986
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to BobMarleyNYR
Don't worry he's going to chastise anything you say... in a barely comprehensible manner.

BobMarleyNYR is offline  
Old
07-25-2004, 12:16 AM
  #25
little a from da bx
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 375
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Steinbrenner
perhaps i thought berard was 30 because he has played for so long. it doesn't matter letting him go was a good move. trading york wasn't a good move but if poti ever put all his talent together the trade would be a steal
they key word is if he "would" ( but can he ) ????? he hasnt so, your point makes no sense its like saying if i traded steve yzerman to nyi for scatchard thhats a bad trade , but if scatchard scores like yzerman or better it would be a steal. thats how ridiculous your comment is. hes not producing and he isnt a good fit end of story, sorry if i offended your boyfirends feelings

little a from da bx 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 01:52 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.