Mark Messier

[KingDeathMetal]

The Rangers sacrificed some great talent throughout the 90s, chief among them Amonte, Savard, and Kovalev (at least we have a Cup to show for the Amonte trade), but those blows would have been easy to take if our drafting record from 95-99 was at least a tick above terrible. But it wasn't just terrible - our draft picks during that time were beyond worthless. Besides Marc Savard in 95, the Rangers didn't draft a single player who was better than 4th line or third pairing quality, and even those picks were few and far between. Mike York and Manny Malhotra are basically the highlights of our draft picks from those years, which is crazy considering that Manny was a huge disappointment.

The only thing I'll say in our defense, is that the mid-late 90s NHL drafts were for the most part a talent abyss. Those drafts read like a hall of fame of first and second round disappointments. Probably explains why the stars from the 80s and 90s continued to be premiere NHL players well into the early 00s, because there just wasn't anybody to take the baton aside from what, Joe Thornton, Daniel Alfredsson, and Marian Hossa? Vinny Lecavalier? Yawn. Thankfully it wasn't long before we got players like Ovie, Sid, Kane, Karlsson, McDavid, etc. Late 90s was just brutal.

Regardless, look at our top two picks from each draft in that era:

1995
Christian Dube (39th)
Mike Martin (65th)

1996
Jeff Brown (22nd)
Daniel Goneau (48th)

1997
Stefan Cherneski (19th)
Wes Jarvis (46th)

1998
Manny Malhotra (7th)
Randy Copley (40th)

1999
Pavel Brendl (4th)
Jamie Lundmark (9th)

Terrible. Most of these guys didn't even play a season in the NHL, and didn't seem to matter how high or low they were taken. Our lower picks for each year don't look much better. Say what you want about Sather, but our drafting record immediately improved during his tenure.

Here are some of the names of players who were drafted at least three spots after the above names, that became NHL regulars (essentially players we missed on):

Chris McAllister (95)
Peter Schaefer (95)
Brad Isbister (95)

Daniel Briere (96)
Colin White (96)

Kristian Huselius (97)
Henrik Tallinder (97)

Mark Bell (98)
Mike Rupp (98)
Nik Antropov (98) (Prob the only player in this 1998 bunch that was better than Manny)
Ossi Vaananen (98)

Tim Connolly (99)
Oleg Saprykin (99)

None of these names are franchise changing, but one, two, or three of these players as regulars in our lineup could have made a big difference, possibly could have meant a playoff birth in one or two of those years where we missed. Imagine if we kept Savard and drafted Isbister, Briere and Huselius?

Our fans today are spoiled. Every year we have another one or two players in their early 20s making the team out of camp and contributing right away. There was once a time where that almost never happened.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Last season we had 5(!) players we picked in the first round in the line-up for the first time since 1989.

 

[Steve Kournianos]

When Neil Smith was hired & we won the division in 89-90, things were definitely trending in the right direction. However, I think the optimism that we were serious cup contenders was quite premature as witnessed by the back to back drubbings by the Caps in 90 & 91. Those two series were ugly & the '91 series was barely more competitive than the year before. Considering Washington was ousted in the subsequent rounds both times, how far would we have realistically gone if we had beaten them?

I absolutely think we were on the right track with all the young talent Smith was assembling. However, if you look back on those rosters, there is a serious lack of depth, especially on the blue line. In the '90 playoffs we were dressing guys like Jeff Bloemberg as the 6th D. Behind Leetch, we had James Patrick & not much else. I always admired how hard guys like Mark Hardy & David Shaw competed, but they were just not good enough.

The bottom line is, IMO, before Messier the Rangers were more dreamers than contenders. Bringing him here showed the league & the fans that the Rangers needed to be taken seriously for the first time since the 70s. If you were old enough to recall that day, which you were, I literally got chills when I heard the news. Every Islander fan I knew was really unhappy about it.

The 1990 team was a legit contender even after the Leetch injury because there was no clear favorite once the Flames were bounced by the Kings. The Bruins had the best record but the Rangers matched up well with them.

The Caps series wasnt a rout. They lost two of the last 3 in OT, and even in 1991 they were up 2-1, then lost Game 5 in OT. Both were close and by no means did it make most Rangers fans think the team was stagnant or not a team on the rise.

Again, Messier pushed them over the top, but he wasnt a singular savior. Chances are, the 1992 team challenged for the division without Messier, and the quality of the Youth they had means a Cup run was destined somewhere between 1993-1998.

But I agree Messier validated them and they dont win the actual Cup without him.

 

[ReggieDunlop68]

It's a very slippery slope and impossible for to say with any certainty. The only thing we do know is that they made the trades and they won a cup.

Having said, I will admit to daydreaming about a roster with a prime Amonte, Weight, Zubov and Nordstrom, and a trade for a guy like Shanahan that would've put them right in the mix in 95-99.

That's one HOF player, maybe two, and two guys who are level just below that.

I heard ya. The Rangers would have certainly been dominant for longer. I was trying to highlife the fact that the Devils, Red Wings, and Avalanche would still have been better than the hypothetical Ranger team, so the mortgage of the future for the cup looks even better.

 

[TKG]

It's a very slippery slope and impossible for to say with any certainty. The only thing we do know is that they made the trades and they won a cup.

Having said, I will admit to daydreaming about a roster with a prime Amonte, Weight, Zubov and Nordstrom, and a trade for a guy like Shanahan that would've put them right in the mix in 95-99.

That's one HOF player, maybe two, and two guys who are level just below that.

What gets lost to many people is we needed all of the trades to get the Cup.

It took the Rangers 7 games in the greatest hockey series I've ever seen (Devils). And then 7 for the Rangers to beat the Canucks.

Its not like they went for overkill just for one run. Everyone down to Jay Wells had a key moment. Its just sad it was built like a house of cards...

 

[Boris Zubov]

The 1990 team was a legit contender even after the Leetch injury because there was no clear favorite once the Flames were bounced by the Kings. The Bruins had the best record but the Rangers matched up well with them.

The Caps series wasnt a rout. They lost two of the last 3 in OT, and even in 1991 they were up 2-1, then lost Game 5 in OT. Both were close and by no means did it make most Rangers fans think the team was stagnant or not a team on the rise.

Again, Messier pushed them over the top, but he wasnt a singular savior. Chances are, the 1992 team challenged for the division without Messier, and the quality of the Youth they had means a Cup run was destined somewhere between 1993-1998.

But I agree Messier validated them and they dont win the actual Cup without him.

This is just a case of two fans looking back with two different perspectives. We can certainly agree to disagree. With that said, the Leetch injury in '90 basically relegated them from contenders to pretenders. When it happened, I can vividly remember turning to my buddy & both of us saying, "there goes our shot at the Cup".

Those two Washington series left a very bitter taste in my mouth which is why I tend to remember them as being more one sided than they might've been. However, we had two VERY ugly losses in Games 2 & 3 of the '90 series where the Rangers were NOT competitive.

Yes the heart-breaker of that series was Game 4 when we tied the game in the last two minutes from being down 3-1. But when that tool Langway scored in first minute of OT, the series for all intents & purposes, was over. The Rangers had to expend so much energy in that game just to get to OT, which told me the Caps were just the better team. That & John &@%*^*@ Druce happened to become Wayne Gretzky for those 5 games!

Believe me, I loved those teams. 83-97 was the height of my NYR fandom; nobody rooted harder for them than I did. However, when I look back, it's clear to me that we simply weren't good enough from 89-91. We lacked sufficient depth up front, we barely had two scoring lines. Our 3rd & 4th lines were gritty but virtually invisible on the stat sheet, & the D was ridiculously top heavy & did not have a shut down defenseman on the roster. Brian Leetch is my favorite Ranger ever, but he was still a bit deficient in his own end at that point in time.

Clearly Neil Smith saw the writing on the wall, & subsequently began overhauling the team in the summer of '91. Along with Amonte & Weight (who both played 1 game in the '91 Caps series), we added Graves, Nemchinov, Tim Kerr, Randy Gilhen, Beukeboom, Jay Wells, & of course Messier. None of them were on the '91 team but all played significant minutes in the '92 playoffs(although I believe Weight was hurt in the Pens series). That's almost 50% of the skaters in less than a year. A huge roster turnover that paid huge dividends.

As I stated in a previous post, there was an article in the Times that summer where Smith basically called out the team's effort, saying they didn't compete hard enough against the Caps in '91 & it was unacceptable. He was furious after the 1st round exit & knew he had to make significant changes if we were to reach the next level. The next level was still a flame out in the playoffs, but that '92 team was the one that was on the cusp after the trade for Mess propelled us to the President's Trophy. (side note...if Ron Francis doesn't score from center ice I'm still convinced we win it all that year)

I'll certainly agree the 90-91 team was a lock for a playoff spot & a strong contender for their division. However, before Messier was traded, the opening night roster of the 91-92 team was really a work in progress. They lost their captain to expansion, & added a bunch of new guys who you weren't quite sure how the pieces of puzzle were supposed to fit. So when you state they were on the cusp of seriously contending for the Cup before Messier, we probably won't see eye to eye. And that's ok. Simply because it's ancient history & it all worked out in the end.

 

[Edge]

I heard ya. The Rangers would have certainly been dominant for longer. I was trying to highlife the fact that the Devils, Red Wings, and Avalanche would still have been better than the hypothetical Ranger team, so the mortgage of the future for the cup looks even better.

I'm not so sure I agree with that.

The Wings would be minus Shanahan, who would now be on the Rangers. That's easily another (40-40-80).

Just looking at likely totals, the Rangers would also have had Zubov (10-55-65), Amonte (40-40-80) and Weight (25-50-75).

Frankly, I put those added pieces, plus what the Rangers already had, up against the Wings (minus Shanahan), Devils and Avalanche. Heck, that almost looks like an EA sports roster.

 

[Leetch3]

this is a great messier story from kypreos about going to the china club