Rumor: Trade Rumors Thread Part 5: NYR Interested in Boyle, Gaborik Available (MOD: READ OP)

[YoSoyLalo]

Here's the problem. Lev. If the reports are true that both Boston and Pittsburgh were on Iginla's list, then Feaster did his ownership and fanbase a disservice by giving Iginla final say of his destination. I was pissed when Sather allowed Messier that input in 2004. Feaster took a worse deal. How do I know that? It's Feaster, who saw fit to drastically over pay both Wideman and Hudler, not to mention that almost was the ROR waiver situation. Howson may have been unrealistic. Feaster is clueless.

Iginla has a NMC. There was no "list", he could have had a 1 team "list". Seems like he did when it came down to it.

 

[Pizza]

Checkmate, Ray Shero!!

When I saw the reaction to the trade last night, I had a mini fantasy.

Imagine one of our little nothings from nowhere (Hags, Jesper or Frodo) picking either Syd's or Iggy's pocket, walking in MAF and ending a series. Now that would be bedlam!

 

[tjs252]

I would think so, or he probably wouldn't have made the trip to Ottowa.

Just a wild guess (and based on the fact he made it to Ottawa while the team was still in Philly) but he may have visa issues to resolve with the US that may not exist in/with Canada. I don't think he plays until that's resolved, but I'm just taking an, admitted, wild guess.

 

[Championship*]

In reality, Feaster should have delt him last year and that's the bottom line. He would have gotten much more.

 

[Levitate]

In reality, Feaster should have delt him last year and that's the bottom line. He would have gotten much more.

Yup, that's the issue. Calgary kept thinking they could retool and win it and Iginla would be a big part of that and they wasted years of his play

 

[Championship*]

Yup, that's the issue. Calgary kept thinking they could retool and win it and Iginla would be a big part of that and they wasted years of his play

Horrible asset management. Why is it that joes like us can make a better assessment of a team than the ones who are actually paid to do it?

 

[RangerBoy]

Flames ownership had final say with Iginla. The no move clause gave Iginla the hammer to call his own shots. He is a free agent this summer. The GM works for ownership and they love Iginla.

 

[cd211]

Yup, that's the issue. Calgary kept thinking they could retool and win it and Iginla would be a big part of that and they wasted years of his play

Calgs is a joke.. they started the "Rebuilding" process when Phaneuf was traded in that mega blockbuster 3yrs ago or whatev..and where are they today.. still a franchise with a bunch of mismatched UFAs that joined their team.. I am really surprised Iggy didn't ask for a trade way earlier in his career.. Glad he was traded but obv upset it was to pit.. wish it was LA or Hawks..

calg was never serious about a rebuild bc they shouldve committed and traded pieces a lot earlier.. i've yet to see them have serious prospects come up through the ranks and play.. they have a bunch of career jouryman on that team.. i feel sad for their fans.. they deserve better!

 

[Bluenote13]

All these things I'm reading from Ranger fans about Calgary sounds alot like what other teams fans have said about us over the years. The irony.

 

[Trxjw]

Calgs is a joke.. they started the "Rebuilding" process when Phaneuf was traded in that mega blockbuster 3yrs ago or whatev..and where are they today.. still a franchise with a bunch of mismatched UFAs that joined their team.. I am really surprised Iggy didn't ask for a trade way earlier in his career.. Glad he was traded but obv upset it was to pit.. wish it was LA or Hawks..

calg was never serious about a rebuild bc they shouldve committed and traded pieces a lot earlier.. i've yet to see them have serious prospects come up through the ranks and play.. they have a bunch of career jouryman on that team.. i feel sad for their fans.. they deserve better!

That sounds vaguely familiar, but I can't quite put my finger on why...

 

[The Gloaming]

Calgs is a joke.. they started the "Rebuilding" process when Phaneuf was traded in that mega blockbuster 3yrs ago or whatev..and where are they today.. still a franchise with a bunch of mismatched UFAs that joined their team.. I am really surprised Iggy didn't ask for a trade way earlier in his career.. Glad he was traded but obv upset it was to pit.. wish it was LA or Hawks..

calg was never serious about a rebuild bc they shouldve committed and traded pieces a lot earlier.. i've yet to see them have serious prospects come up through the ranks and play.. they have a bunch of career jouryman on that team.. i feel sad for their fans.. they deserve better!

Yep. For one, they should have never signed Hudler and Wideman this summer. That's not a move a rebuilding team makes. Why are JayBo, Giordanno, Camellari, Glencross, The Anton, Sarich and co. still on that team? No direction at all. Why trade Bourque for Camalleri? Seems like a pretty lateral, pointless move. There's just so much wrong with Calgary.

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

When I saw the reaction to the trade last night, I had a mini fantasy.

Imagine one of our little nothings from nowhere (Hags, Jesper or Frodo) picking either Syd's or Iggy's pocket, walking in MAF and ending a series. Now that would be bedlam!

You weren't the only one.

 

[Levitate]

All these things I'm reading from Ranger fans about Calgary sounds alot like what other teams fans have said about us over the years. The irony.

I don't think you'll find any Rangers fans that disagree with that assessment. The Rangers are better run now, mostly, but were obviously one of the worst run franchises in the NHL for the late 90's and early 2000's

 

[Championship*]

All these things I'm reading from Ranger fans about Calgary sounds alot like what other teams fans have said about us over the years. The irony.

Who better to recognize it? We can smell our own.

 

[Bluenote13]

I don't think you'll find any Rangers fans that disagree with that assessment. The Rangers are better run now, mostly, but were obviously one of the worst run franchises in the NHL for the late 90's and early 2000's

I wouldn't stop at 'early' 2000's

'Lately' means nothing to me when I'm looking at a team barely in 8th place after being a 'Cup Favorite' going into the year. In that sense, not much has changed around here except the carpet and drapes.

 

[NikC]

That sounds vaguely familiar, but I can't quite put my finger on why...

how does that resemble the NYR? I'm not downplaying the stupidity of overhauling our bottom six, but how are we a franchise of mismatched UFAs? Gaborik and Richards are surely underperforming, but it's not as if on paper they wouldn't be perfect together?

I just don't understand why you and other long time poster insist on continually drawing parallells between our current situation and the problems of the era (98'-04') prior to our rebuild?
It's not as if we just resigned Kovalev and Lidstrom... give a rest already...

 

[Levitate]

I wouldn't stop at 'early' 2000's

'Lately' means nothing to me when I'm looking at a team barely in 8th place after being a 'Cup Favorite' going into the year. In that sense, not much has changed around here except the carpet and drapes.

well I was counting 2004 as "early", since you can argue they started doing some things right after that

And I'm not sure I agree with that last part because compared to the 2003/2004 NY Rangers, it's an entirely different house. Maybe the neighborhood isn't as good as we thought it was and the basement leaks, but it's still better than the one that burned to the ground.

In more practical terms, the Rangers have a solid core of young players that they didn't have anything close to 10 years ago, or even perhaps 5 years ago, and their drafting has been what I'd consider solid, even if it hasn't been plucking amazing gems. Why things haven't exactly come together this year, I don't know. You could write a lengthy post about how the Rangers haven't been able to draft a star forward and have had to try to rely on free agency to fill that void and the effect that has had on this season. Or you could note how the teams that have successfully rebuilt have generally done so recently by acquiring high draft picks one way or another and drafting stud players, which the Rangers have not been able to do (acquire high draft picks that is), but when it comes down to it, the current state of the team doesn't much resemble the dumpster fire it was 10 years ago

 

[NikC]

I wouldn't stop at 'early' 2000's

'Lately' means nothing to me when I'm looking at a team barely in 8th place after being a 'Cup Favorite' going into the year. In that sense, not much has changed around here except the carpet and drapes.

two entirely different eras. once again, the skewed mindset emerges that chooses to see all current struggles in light of mistakes made over 10 yrs ago.

 

[Bluenote13]

well I was counting 2004 as "early", since you can argue they started doing some things right after that

Henrik.

And I'm not sure I agree with that last part because compared to the 2003/2004 NY Rangers, it's an entirely different house. Maybe the neighborhood isn't as good as we thought it was and the basement leaks, but it's still better than the one that burned to the ground.

In more practical terms, the Rangers have a solid core of young players that they didn't have anything close to 10 years ago, or even perhaps 5 years ago, and their drafting has been what I'd consider solid, even if it hasn't been plucking amazing gems. Why things haven't exactly come together this year, I don't know. You could write a lengthy post about how the Rangers haven't been able to draft a star forward and have had to try to rely on free agency to fill that void and the effect that has had on this season. Or you could note how the teams that have successfully rebuilt have generally done so recently by acquiring high draft picks one way or another and drafting stud players, which the Rangers have not been able to do (acquire high draft picks that is), but when it comes down to it, the current state of the team doesn't much resemble the dumpster fire it was 10 years ago

Again, w/o Henrik, the core of amazing youth still would be where? Out of the playoffs.

I like alot of the young players on this team. I still think the Nash trade was great, no brainer, even if it meant one step forward two steps back. The fact they don't mirror the team from 10 years ago should not be some badge of honor.

At least acknowledge it's taken 10 years to get to 'on the right path'.

 

[Trxjw]

how does that resemble the NYR? I'm not downplaying the stupidity of overhauling our bottom six, but how are we a franchise of mismatched UFAs? Gaborik and Richards are surely underperforming, but it's not as if on paper they wouldn't be perfect together?

I just don't understand why you and other long time poster insist on continually drawing parallells between our current situation and the problems of the era (98'-04') prior to our rebuild?
It's not as if we just resigned Kovalev and Lidstrom... give a rest already...

Gaborik and Richards are just two of a laundry list of UFA signings that have either "struggled" in NY or have outright failed. What makes Calgary so different from us? They've relied heavily on an elite goaltender for years and the Phaneuf trade wasn't the signalling of a "rebuild" it was a "retooling"; Which is exactly what we've been doing over and over every year since the 2004 fire-sale.

I don't think "mismatched UFAs" is any different than "poor UFA acquisitions." You can use whatever terminology you like, but Calgary's refusal to rebuild their team isn't all that much different than how this team continues to shuffle the deck chairs each year. The only real difference is that we throw far more money at players than Calgary does.

 

[Riche16]

how does that resemble the NYR? I'm not downplaying the stupidity of overhauling our bottom six, but how are we a franchise of mismatched UFAs? Gaborik and Richards are surely underperforming, but it's not as if on paper they wouldn't be perfect together?

I just don't understand why you and other long time poster insist on continually drawing parallells between our current situation and the problems of the era (98'-04') prior to our rebuild?
It's not as if we just resigned Kovalev and Lidstrom... give a rest already...

Just because you don't agree with it... doesn't mean that it's not how others see it. Including, most definitely, fans of other teams.

They see us land Richards and trade for Nash, the two biggest names available in past two years and see us in and out of a play-off spot and feel nothing has changed. some would argue that they're right.

Knowledagble fans know we don't get high draft pics, we don't tank, the NHL wouldn't rig a lottery for us... we have to poach free agent talent in order to compete.

 

[Bluenote13]

two entirely different eras. once again, the skewed mindset emerges that chooses to see all current struggles in light of mistakes made over 10 yrs ago.

You'd say this team was not disappointing after making proactive costly moves with lofty preseason expectations ? IN THAT SENSE, not much has changed.

 

[Levitate]

Henrik.



Again, w/o Henrik, the core of amazing youth still would be where? Out of the playoffs.

Or they would have found another goalie that would get them to the playoffs?

I mean, you can't really just throw out everything else because Lundqvist is a great goalie. They've missed the playoffs with Lundqvist as their goalie because the team wasn't very strong in other areas. They were the top team in the east last year because they were a strong team in most areas and Lundqvist was great.

There is some amount of a "sliding scale" so to speak in terms of a teams makeup and performance. The Rangers do have a lot of good young players and there's a lot to be said for that, rather than just dismissing it because their star goalie is still the one who carries the load. I'd rather they be in the current situation than have a team of absolute crap and a star goalie and be in a similar situation. At least the current situation lends itself to a scenario where they can become good again very quickly with the right moves or the right players performing.

I like alot of the young players on this team. I still think the Nash trade was great, no brainer, even if it meant one step forward two steps back. The fact they don't mirror the team from 10 years ago should not be some badge of honor.

At least acknowledge it's taken 10 years to get to 'on the right path'.

It doesn't have to be a "badge of honor". It doesn't have to be one extreme or the other. I'd say currently the Rangers are pretty average or maybe a little above average in terms of how they're run compared to other teams in the league, not that they're an amazing franchise that does everything right or something. They draft solid, they have a bunch of solid young players, they're OK. Doesn't mean there isn't a lot of room for improvement, obviously.

I'm also still not entirely sure what conclusions to draw from this shortened season with no training camp, etc.

 

[Bluenote13]

Lev, one pessimistic post would not kill you. Between you and Pizza, I don't think there's one negative post about this team between you two. That's really the only reason I respond, at least you two have seniority over the others who just defend the team at EVERY stop.

 

[HatTrick Swayze]

Also you could argue that without Henrik the "core of youth" would include Stamkos, Doughty, Pietrangelo, Tavares, E. Kane, etc.

Maybe all the rants on here would be about being 28th in the league in GA.

Yes ok fine more like Glennie, MPS, Filatov, or Teubert.