Jerrydevil Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 Well, I'm less inclined to chalk up the Rangers' failures to misfortune than you are, C. I thought the Lindros trade was a bad move at the time by Sather and I still think it's bad. The Bure trade I waver on. On the one hand, the Rangers didn't have to give up a whole lot to get a bonafide weapon, and on the other hand, he has his own baggage Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-C- Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 Devs25, Derek brought it all on himself at the Cafe. He was given a warm welcome, but insisted on name-dropping and numerous references to his internship at ESPN as to why he knew more about hockey than any of us. He has a special fondness for me because of an article he authored on the Cafe about the Sabres former owners. When he asked for comments, I pointed out the many fact errors in his piece, all easily avoidable had he had done any research. So maybe it seems like some of us like to give Derek a hard time, but I assure you that's not the case. Other than references to his numerous nickname changes, of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#10 Duguay Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 Jerry - C didn't say that Sather has improved the Rangers - he says their farm system.....which is definitely true. Something else that is true is that PurpleK doesn't get it. Another truth? Kovy kicked outta the Cafe! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 Well Jerry, the thing about Lindros was, this was a one time shot.. and not much of a gamble. Kim Johnsson I was never impressed with, and while he's developed into a solid D in Philadelphia, Brendl has done nothing and Jan Hlavac is now on his 6th franchise and 4th NHL team. Same with Bure. The Rangers wouldn't have had another shot at either of the two.. the injury to Bure is expected, but Lindros's poor play this year is inexcusable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#10 Duguay Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 Triumph gets it......if Lindros scored 40 this year which was expected, the Rangers wouldn't be under .500 He's killing the Rangers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerrydevil Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 I agree that Lindros' underachievement is hurting the Rangers. Keeping the puck out of the net is hurting just as much though. I watch Ranger games when the Devils aren't playing or during Devil intermissions, and I've seen opponents get odd-man rushes on the Rangers WITHOUT a turnover. And the goaltending? Well, there's another thing you can kill Sather about, as I know #10 Duguay has many times. Signing Richter was not a good decision. I think you can also kill Sather for not playing hardball with Nedved when he became an RFA. By the way, Duguay, you didn't like my song I posted in the cafe? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devs25 Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 -C-, thanks for the explanation. I guess all of you need to just agree to disagree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-C- Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 Jerry - C didn't say that Sather has improved the Rangers - he says their farm system.....which is definitely true. Actually, I did say that the Sather improved the Rangers. However, my definition of improvement may be different from Jerry's. When Sather took over, the Rangers not only had no prospects but also a fractured locker room, no tougness and an old roster. I can remember distinctly Smith's final year how the Rangers would get knocked around and even intimidated by teams like the Flyers. Remember Rob Dimao? That doesn't happen now, the team is bigger, younger and more skilled. There was no one even close to Lindros and Bure in offensive talent back then. Now, if he could only land a defensive d-man... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-C- Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 And the goaltending? Well, there's another thing you can kill Sather about, as I know #10 Duguay has many times. Signing Richter was not a good decision. True, but someone of Dunham's calibre wasn't available over the summer. Unless he wanted to overpay for CuJo or Belfour. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insanity_gallops Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 Now, if he could only land a defensive d-man... A legitimate question posed to Rangers fans: WHY was Kaspar signed? Was he considered to be a strong defensive d-man who would help this organization? If so, I'll argue with that. There anyone in the free agent market over the summer you'd rather have seen signed with the NYR instead of Kaspar? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#10 Duguay Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 No - Kaspar is a disrupter, a guy who you can't forget is on the ice. He's never been great defensively, but never been as bad as he's been this year. There was no defenseman on the market that would have been better suited, unless they actually got Chelios, who was never leaving Detroit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insanity_gallops Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 True, but someone of Dunham's calibre wasn't available over the summer. Unless he wanted to overpay for CuJo or Belfour. I agree that CuJo and Belfour were overpaid, but (sorry, but have to take a knock at the organization) signing one of them to an outrageous contract would have continued the trend of the summer signings for the Rangers. I think that if the Rangers had held off on signing Richter they could have signed someone like Dafoe for much less, since his market dried up quickly. But I'll admit, landing Dunham was a smart move. He'll give strong play for the rest of the season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risky Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 hahahahahah I'd MUCH rather "overpay" Curtis Joseph than pay Bobby Hole-lick $9 million a year for 20 points and 50 bad penalties or Kaspar $4.5 million for his -20. I could do a better job than Sather. BOOK IT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#10 Duguay Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 That's if you believe that Dafoe is any good......................I tend not to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-C- Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 Not just this year, Dunham is also signed for the next 2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insanity_gallops Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 That's if you believe that Dafoe is any good......................I tend not to. Fair enough. I just think the Rangers could have signed Dafoe for less money than Richter (arguably with good reason for the difference in pay). And if they'd been unhappy with him, not a lot of money would have been wasted and they still could have pulled off a deal like the Dunham one. Good ol' counterfactual speculation.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insanity_gallops Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 Not just this year, Dunham is also signed for the next 2. True, which makes the deal better. But after this season he'll be resigned to the backup role again, unless he splits time evenly with Richter -- which I don't see happening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#10 Duguay Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 Richter is going to retire. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-C- Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 I don't think Richter is coming back. I expect him to retire this summer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek21 Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 The Cafe sucks. They have bullies over there who when you don't agree with them, they take potshots at you and lobby to have you banned. My ban was never explained by Alex. Rob emailed me on it. But there was never an explanation. My guess is an arrogant jerk like Duguay probably influenced them to kick me out. Most fans over there don't like to hear anything but what they say. When you disagree with them, it's the end of the world. I'm taking a break. Enjoy the season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insanity_gallops Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 Random Rangers-related question. Is it just me, or is Holik making 4+ times the amount Lindros is this season? TFP reports Holik making 9.6 million, while Lindros makes 2.1 million. ...whaaaaaaa? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#10 Duguay Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 Once again proving you have no clue. Imagine me having the power to have someone removed from the Cafe. You WENT AFTER the two owners of the site like a raving lunatic. (which I'm sure wouldn't surprise anyone here) What did you think they'd do? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-C- Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 My ban was never explained by Alex. Rob emailed me on it. But there was never an explanation. My guess is that when you told Rob he was "worse than C", that did it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#10 Duguay Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 Lindros has tons of incentives....if he reaches none of them, then that figure is correct. 2.1 million. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-C- Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 Random Rangers-related question.Is it just me, or is Holik making 4+ times the amount Lindros is this season? TFP reports Holik making 9.6 million, while Lindros makes 2.1 million. ...whaaaaaaa? Holik's number includes his signing bonus, not just the base salary. Lindros' is just the base guaranteed salary. His contract is loaded with incentive clauses that pay him close to $8MM per if he stays healthy and has a decent season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.