Non-Ranger fans opinion...

[Rogueldr 0]

If he was a little older and more seasoned Callahan would have the "C" for sure. I've wanted Sather fired since 2004. Sather, to me, will always be the man who traded Brian Leetch. Oh and how are all those players he got for Leetch panning out? Oh yeah none of them are still Rangers.

[BenderHockey 127]

If he was a little older and more seasoned Callahan would have the "C" for sure. I've wanted Sather fired since 2004. Sather, to me, will always be the man who traded Brian Leetch. Oh and how are all those players he got for Leetch panning out? Oh yeah none of them are still Rangers.

Forget the Rangers, are any of them even still in the NHL? Who DID they end up getting? All I can remember is Max Kondratiev.

[burrn 0]

I do believe that Drury is a good captain, and him, Callahan/Prospal/Dubinsky can be a core they could rebuild upon (although Dru is getting older now).

On the Jagr thing, you probably know he was really hurting the team back when he was with Washington. That is not what the C is supposed to do. But there's probably no argument that he played exciting hockey, and it does seem like he enjoyed being in NY at least more than he did in Washington, but still, there was way more he could have done. And that just shows that stats don't necessarily have to do with leadership skills (not saying they are completely separate). That is why Drury can be a good leader. He may not score often, but when he does, its those decisive goals that mean so much in a game. Plus his presence in front of net, pressure on the forecheck. He does have the skills, and however subtle they may be, they are indispensable team skills.

On another note, I recall there was someone here that said they should trade Gabby for guys in Chicago to rebuild, and yeah you've gotta love gabby for what he's done this year, but the defensive reinforcement is much more of a priority, especially if you have a guy like Henrik. And this comes from a guy that got a Gaborik Jersey as soon as I could find one. If he could stay healthy (which is pretty questinonable at this point), not only could he be a great scorer for the team, he could be great trading bait.

[The Mafia Line 0]

Sather has been pretty bad but not "I need your head on a stick" bad. He managed to bring in Jagr for nothing and have Washington pay most of his salary. He basically traded Gomez for Gaborik, payed them the same salary. He signed Gomez and Drury, who were two of the top 4 free agents that year. None of those 4 panned out great and ANY GM would have taken Drury and Gomez easy. Getting Prospal for like $1M when no one else wanted him.

The Major problem is that the last 5 years the Rangers have been very mediocre because of Lundqvist (Smith draft pick) and Sather just can't get them into a contender because of a few major gaffes. Signing Redden to that crazy deal, overpaying Rozival, signing both Drury and Gomez (This was both a good and bad signing for many reasons).

But his worst mistake that plagues the team in the lineup every night and embarrasses all Ranger fans is Hugh Jesseman. Yes the fact that the Rangers drafted the only player in the 2003 to never play an NHL game is a major reason this team is where it is. That draft was so deep you could throw a rock into the crowd and hit a surefire NHLer and the Rangers missed entirely. They could have drafted Dustin Brown, Brent Seabrook, Zach Parise, Ryan Keslar, Mike Richards, Corry Perry, Ryan Getzlaf which all went after Hugh Jessiman.

It's time for Sather to go. I wouldn't do him like some Ranger fans, but it's Dolan's fault. If Sather gets run out of town by the press and the fans one of these days it's only because Dolan didn't realize it after last season and fire him with a little dignity, now Sather will have to get trashed and smeared before Dolan would do the right thing.

[BenderHockey 127]

The Major problem is that the last 5 years the Rangers have been very mediocre because of Lundqvist

I'm sorry, but are you serious? The Rangers are mediocre BECAUSE OF Lundqvist? Wow.

Yes the fact that the Rangers drafted the only player in the 2003 to never play an NHL game is a major reason this team is where it is.

Actually, it is the only player in the FIRST ROUND of the '03 draft never to play in the show. It is a reason, but I wouldn't say the major reason. Lots of reasons for that.

[Chadd 916]

Their lack of scouting and player development has hurt them over the years. They're doing better over the last couple years, but they need to do better for a while to clean up that mess. The Roszival and Redden deals are really tough on the team and paying that much for Drury hurts them over the long term as well, and I'm a big fan of the guy.

[mug25 2]

It's so sad. The past two games (5-0 vs Islanders and a Shootout win vs a hot Devils team) the Rangers have played great. Why cant they play with this kind of intensity from the get go?

[The Mafia Line 0]

I'm sorry, but are you serious? The Rangers are mediocre BECAUSE OF Lundqvist? Wow.

Actually, it is the only player in the FIRST ROUND of the '03 draft never to play in the show. It is a reason, but I wouldn't say the major reason. Lots of reasons for that.

Yes, I am serious. The only reason the Rangers are mediocre is because of Lundqvist. Without him the Rangers would suck.

And actually the 2003 draft is a major reason, along with overpaying some players. If you plug Getzlaf or Richards or Parise or Perry into this lineup, all of a sudden the Rangers are THAT much better.

[chilaxin12 2]

In reading this thread I think the overall trend is the same...The problems at the top, with ownership and management. Horrible contracts for Rozi, Redden, Drury, making trades at the deadline to acquire prust and shelly instead of scorers or defense, the lack of a true top line center, the lack of a true blue line anchor, all of those are management decisions and the rangers have failed horribly with them and until these bad contracts go away and our bad ideas with management leave the Rangers will continue to suck, that plus the fact they play in the East meaning against Sid, Ovie, and now Stamkos is going to make it harder for the Rangers to get better soon.

The bright side is we have been drafting better, Borque, Kreider, Grachev, Stephan up front and McDonagh, Potter, Sauer, Sanguinetti are all solid prospects and should be able to be in the NHL within 3 years time.

I think this years team could have been vastly different if we were able to keep Semenov, we would have had a NHL quality defensemen and perhaps could have sent down rozi or redden, he was big, not afraid to hit, and being 6'6 couldn't have hurt to have back there considering all the "soft" defenders we already have.

[mug25 2]

In reading this thread I think the overall trend is the same...The problems at the top, with ownership and management. Horrible contracts for Rozi, Redden, Drury, making trades at the deadline to acquire prust and shelly instead of scorers or defense, the lack of a true top line center, the lack of a true blue line anchor, all of those are management decisions and the rangers have failed horribly with them and until these bad contracts go away and our bad ideas with management leave the Rangers will continue to suck, that plus the fact they play in the East meaning against Sid, Ovie, and now Stamkos is going to make it harder for the Rangers to get better soon.

The bright side is we have been drafting better, Borque, Kreider, Grachev, Stephan up front and McDonagh, Potter, Sauer, Sanguinetti are all solid prospects and should be able to be in the NHL within 3 years time.

I think this years team could have been vastly different if we were able to keep Semenov, we would have had a NHL quality defensemen and perhaps could have sent down rozi or redden, he was big, not afraid to hit, and being 6'6 couldn't have hurt to have back there considering all the "soft" defenders we already have.

If you've been watching the games as of late, getting Prust & Shelley has worked out great. The 4th line has been scoring, finishing checks and virtually neutralizing some of the oppositions top lines. For what the Rangers "paid" in exchange for the two I think they came out on top. Jokinen however is another story. He's been absolutely terrible — then again, how much worse than Higgins has he been?

To touch on the drafting, yes I am excited for those guys but only if they get the ice time that they deserve. Look at what happened to Petr Prucha. First year in the NHL he scores 30 goals, second year 22, granted he had a really bad third season he ended up being a scratch for most of his fourth season. Now he's doing fairly decent for the Coyotes.

The Rangers have had some bad luck with picks too. Dan Blackburn's career ending injury, Alexei Cherepanov (RIP) and Hugh Jessimen (LOL). As sad as it may be, that's 3 years of wasted picks. Needless to say the Rangers have had a mixed bag of drafting over the past 10 years. I pray guys like Sanguinetti and Grachev pan out.

[RiSeOnFiRe 0]

I think that he thought you were suggesting that Hank was a detriment to the team, instead of being the only reason they are where they are.

Yes, I am serious. The only reason the Rangers are mediocre is because of Lundqvist. Without him the Rangers would suck.

And actually the 2003 draft is a major reason, along with overpaying some players. If you plug Getzlaf or Richards or Parise or Perry into this lineup, all of a sudden the Rangers are THAT much better.

[Fire0nIce228 1]

In the poll posted in another thread, they surveyed 50 players annonymously and 18% of them said that Torts is the coach they'd least like to play for... Part of the problem...??

[mug25 2]

I think that he thought you were suggesting that Hank was a detriment to the team, instead of being the only reason they are where they are.

I think he's saying that the only reason that the Rangers are mediocre, rather than terrible is b/c of Henrik.

In the poll posted in another thread, they surveyed 50 players annonymously and 18% of them said that Torts is the coach they'd least like to play for... Part of the problem...??

If I recall correctly, Mike Keenan wasn't a favorable coach by players and he helped lead the Rangers to the cup in 94. Then again, he had players like Messier, Richter, Graves, Larmer, Anderson, Noonan etc.,

God I miss that team. I miss Messier the most :(

[SirJW 207]

Hugh Jessimen is toiling in the minors on the Milwaukee Admirals. Would anyone care to give a brief scouting report on him? He he another example that playing in College instead of Major Junior hampers your progress in your quest to the NHL? Will he ever make it to the show?

http://www.milwaukeeadmirals.com/home/team...essiman-39.html

[mug25 2]

Hugh Jessimen is toiling in the minors on the Milwaukee Admirals. Would anyone care to give a brief scouting report on him? He he another example that playing in College instead of Major Junior hampers your progress in your quest to the NHL? Will he ever make it to the show?

http://www.milwaukeeadmirals.com/home/team...essiman-39.html

The worst part about it was this

"On October 30, 2008, Jessiman was traded to the Nashville Predators in exchange for future considerations."

[BenderHockey 127]

Yes, I am serious. The only reason the Rangers are mediocre is because of Lundqvist. Without him the Rangers would suck.

And actually the 2003 draft is a major reason, along with overpaying some players. If you plug Getzlaf or Richards or Parise or Perry into this lineup, all of a sudden the Rangers are THAT much better.

Ok, I mis-read that then. I took it as you were saying that Henrik was holding them down, rather then keeping them up. My bad.

[The Mafia Line 0]

If I recall correctly, Mike Keenan wasn't a favorable coach by players and he helped lead the Rangers to the cup in 94. Then again, he had players like Messier, Richter, Graves, Larmer, Anderson, Noonan etc.,

God I miss that team. I miss Messier the most :(

From what I read, the Rangers won the cup in spite of Mike Keenan. The whole team hated him, especially Leetch. Through out the playoffs, Mike Keenan would talk through Mark Messier and it was Messier who really kept the team from killin Keenan also had a horrible relationship with Neil Smith.

Read "The Rise and Fall of the Stanley Cup Champion New York Rangers" by Barry Meisel. It has some amazingly interesting stories about that team and that season that any Ranger or hockey fan would love.

[Rogueldr 0]

If I recall correctly, Mike Keenan wasn't a favorable coach by players and he helped lead the Rangers to the cup in 94. Then again, he had players like Messier, Richter, Graves, Larmer, Anderson, Noonan etc.

I don't know how you mention all those players and exclude Leetch. Conn Smythe winner.

[mug25 2]

I don't know how you mention all those players and exclude Leetch. Conn Smythe winner.

Yeah, ouch.

Damn that team was so incredible. It really bugs me that it was really the last time we had a team that good.