Puck Daddy Alternate Histories

[Edge]

Yeah, this one was pretty poor. I get the premise, but it didn't have a lot of depth.

I think a more interesting one would be if they never traded for Messier in 91, and essentially tanked the next 3-4 years. If you assume they end up with top 5 picks each year and actually hit on some picks, their lineup could have been something like this by 95/96:

Turcotte/Nicholls/Amonte
Kariya/Weight/Kovalev
Marchant/Nemchinov/Doan

Leetch/Zubov
Norstrom/Ohlund

Richter

In the 1993 draft, the Rangers coveted Jason Arnott. He was their guy. The Oilers snapped him up one pick before the Rangers.What is the Oilers passed and he fell to the Rangers?

I've often wondered how that would've impacted both Arnott and the Rangers.

Arnott stepped in right away, so theoretically he could've/would've made the 1994 Rangers team as a rookie, giving them an instant second line center to replace Weight, whom they traded the previous spring.

The knock on Arnott was that he was a bit of a man-child back then, but how would he have reacted to sitting under the knowledge tree of Messier? Personally, I think it would've been a tremendous boost.

 

[Ian]

2003 and 2010 were also a key moments for me.

My picks were Getzlaf and Tarasenko respectively. Comparing that possibility to the guys we took, Jessiman and McIlrath, highlights two MAJOR, franchise-altering decisions.

I think you could do a whole piece on the alternate history if the Rangers hit on their top pick in the 2000s. Know some of the injuries aren't the Rangers fault, but still.

00: Visnovsky instead of Novak
01: Hemsky or Hamhuis instead of Blackburn
02: Keith instead of Falaradeau
03: ANYONE instead of Jessiman
04: Radulov and Schnieder instead of Korp & Montoya
05: Staal is fine, but there are other better choices in hindsight
06: Giroux instead of Sangs
07: MaxPac instead of Cherepanov (RIP)
08: Eberle or Carlson instead of MDZ
09: Stick with Kreider
10: Tarasenko or Fowler instead of McIlrath

Although maybe a more fun hypothetical would be the Rangers trading up and getting the Sedin twins in 99 instead of Brendl/Lundmark

 

[dstoffa]

I think you could do a whole piece on the alternate history if the Rangers hit on their top pick in the 2000s. Know some of the injuries aren't the Rangers fault, but still.

00: Visnovsky instead of Novak
01: Hemsky or Hamhuis instead of Blackburn
02: Keith instead of Falaradeau
03: ANYONE instead of Jessiman
04: Radulov and Schnieder instead of Korp & Montoya
05: Staal is fine, but there are other better choices in hindsight
06: Giroux instead of Sangs
07: MaxPac instead of Cherepanov (RIP)
08: Eberle or Carlson instead of MDZ
09: Stick with Kreider
10: Tarasenko or Fowler instead of McIlrath

Although maybe a more fun hypothetical would be the Rangers trading up and getting the Sedin twins in 99 instead of Brendl/Lundmark

You'd be continuously rolling over the talent, because in the cap-era, you wouldn't be able to keep your stable.... So how many of these home runs do you need to trade away or lose as a result of the cap?

Hey, it would be a fun problem to have...

 

[Edge]

I think you could do a whole piece on the alternate history if the Rangers hit on their top pick in the 2000s. Know some of the injuries aren't the Rangers fault, but still.

00: Visnovsky instead of Novak
01: Hemsky or Hamhuis instead of Blackburn
02: Keith instead of Falaradeau
03: ANYONE instead of Jessiman
04: Radulov and Schnieder instead of Korp & Montoya
05: Staal is fine, but there are other better choices in hindsight
06: Giroux instead of Sangs
07: MaxPac instead of Cherepanov (RIP)
08: Eberle or Carlson instead of MDZ
09: Stick with Kreider
10: Tarasenko or Fowler instead of McIlrath

Although maybe a more fun hypothetical would be the Rangers trading up and getting the Sedin twins in 99 instead of Brendl/Lundmark

One of my favorite topics to revisit on here once in a while is everyone's biggest hits and misses. It's always entertaining

As for for the context of conversations like the one above, I've always kept it to the guys I preferred, rather than just finding anyone who might've been a better pick.

For me, 2003 and 2010 stand out because I was pretty heavily advocating for the guys I mentioned. So it's more of a McIlrath vs. Taransenko heartache, than it is McIlrath vs. Fowler (who I wasn't a fan of).

 

[tailgunner]

the 2014 cup finals will haunt me to my dying breath

game 1 Rangers are up 2-0 in the first period of game 1 with only a few minutes left in the first period..stepan has the puck behind the net and instead of rifling it off the boards and out he inexplicably passes the puck in front of hank where the puck is turned over and woefully weak goal happens for no sane reason...big difference to head into the locker room up 2-0 after the first period in game 1 instead of 2-1 with a huge momentum swing to LA

game 2 the goalie interference goal by King that was allowed to stand

game 5 the zucc phantom penalty which allowed the tying goal...then in OT McD hits the post and Nash's shot hits the shaft of a stick

 

[EpicDing]

the 2014 cup finals will haunt me to my dying breath

game 1 Rangers are up 2-0 in the first period of game 1 with only a few minutes left in the first period..stepan has the puck behind the net and instead of rifling it off the boards and out he inexplicably passes the puck in front of hank where the puck is turned over and woefully weak goal happens for no sane reason...big difference to head into the locker room up 2-0 after the first period in game 1 instead of 2-1 with a huge momentum swing to LA

game 2 the goalie interference goal by King that was allowed to stand

game 5 the zucc phantom penalty which allowed the tying goal...then in OT McD hits the post and Nash's shot hits the shaft of a stick

I think this is it for me too. The Kings had all the puck luck that series. And Girardi giving the puck to the Kings player in OT in game 1

 

[dstoffa]

I think this is it for me too. The Kings had all the puck luck that series. And Girardi giving the puck to the Kings player in OT in game 1

We did have the snow fort in Game 4.... But I will never forget the camera cutting to the look on Dan's face after the turnover...

But somehow that series was lost in Chicago.

 

[bernmeister]

I'll add not a fan of moving Gartner, Zubov, Amonte either

 

[ReggieDunlop68]

I also wonder what would have happened had the Rangers been awarded Lindros instead of the Flyers...

Leetch, Lindros, and Richter together all in their primes? I like those odds!

If the arbitrator had decided in the Rangers favor, they would have been far and away the best team of all the great teams of the 90s. Furthermore, the AVs would still have 0 cups.

 

[CHGoalie27]

I'll add not a fan of moving Gartner, Zubov, Amonte either

Moving Gartner and Amonte...and Weight won us the Cup.

Now, ZUBOV? ****iing stupidest ****ing goddamn dumbass trade in my life.

 

[NickyFotiu]

If the Arbitration was decided in the Rangers favor, they would have been far and away the best team of all the great teams of the 90s. Furthermore, the AVs would still have 0 cups.

I sure would have liked to see that. Amazing that we had agreed upon deals for both Lindros and Stamkos as young guys but came away with neither at those times.

 

[ReggieDunlop68]

In regard the the Amonte, Weight, and Gartner moves, I'd still make them because I believe that although the Rangers would have stayed highly competitive longer, 1994 was the last chance for the Messier Rangers to win the cup before the META shift at the 94-95 half lockout.

The AVS and Redwings could barely get through each other, so even if we made in to the finals, I don't think we could get through this'd teams.

And even after the trades, we were a "guarantee" away from taking a dump in East Rutherford in game 6, and we needed the "Matteau Matteau Matteau!" in game 7 after Richter let in another really late stinker.

As much as I hate them, the Devils were such a hard organization to play against until the full lockout before the new era.

Also, a lot of the players brought in by the trades were depth who worked well with Iron Mike.

 

[Captain Lindy]

What if Bunny Larooque wasn't hit by a puck in the warmups in game 3 and the Haps kept playing Laroque. We'd have won the Cup in '79?

 

[bernmeister]

Moving Gartner and Amonte...and Weight won us the Cup.

Now, ZUBOV? ****iing stupidest ****ing goddamn dumbass trade in my life.

I would have suffered surrender of Weight as a necessary concession

Gartner, yeah it worked out, but I would have gambled it was more productive to keep them then make those deals.

Finally, for now anyway, I wouldn't have traded that D to LA, forget the name, think it was possibly related to Robatille deal.
no coffee yet, too early to remember...
Scandinavian name...

 

[Edge]

I would have suffered surrender of Weight as a necessary concession

Gartner, yeah it worked out, but I would have gambled it was more productive to keep them then make those deals.

Finally, for now anyway, I wouldn't have traded that D to LA, forget the name, think it was possibly related to Robatille deal.
no coffee yet, too early to remember...
Scandinavian name...

Personally, I felt the Rangers won despite those deadline moves, not because of.

As for the other trade, you're thinking of Norstrom. That was another spectacularly bad trade. The 1994 deadline was the turning point for Smith as a GM. Until then, he had been viewed as a shrewd talent evaluator who won some serious lopsided trades. From the '94 deadline on, it was almost the opposite. And the deals he didn't pull the trigger on were the deals that would've almost certainly worked.

 

[NickyFotiu]

What if Bunny Larooque wasn't hit by a puck in the warmups in game 3 and the Haps kept playing Laroque. We'd have won the Cup in '79?

That is a good question but I thought it was game #2 after we won game 1 on Montreals home ice.

 

[CharlestownChiefsESC]

The greatest what-if from that era for me was Shanahan. Both with St. Louis and later with Hartford. There was a time the Rangers could've had him close to straight-up for Kovalev. Later, with Hartford, the price went up, but nothing that would've killed this team long-term.



The Rangers VERY easily could've had a run similar to Red Wings. The difference was that the Wings made the better moves. They kept the right guys, and brought in the right guys. The Rangers were a lot more spotty with that.

This to a tee. I believe Shanahan was Detroit's final piece in 97, if we had him along with Verbeek in 97 we might be talking 2 cups in the 90s, but imagine if we do make the move for him and don't win in 97. Then Mess bolts and Colorado doesn't match for Sakic. Going into the late 90s we have a forward core of Sakic,Shanahan,Gretzky and Graves, and imagine if we also get Bure in 99 like rumored. With a core like that we at least get 1 more cup, maybe 2.

 

[Edge]

This to a tee. I believe Shanahan was Detroit's final piece in 97, if we had him along with Verbeek in 97 we might be talking 2 cups in the 90s, but imagine if we do make the move for him and don't win in 97. Then Mess bolts and Colorado doesn't match for Sakic. Going into the late 90s we have a forward core of Sakic,Shanahan,Gretzky and Graves, and imagine if we also get Bure in 99 like rumored. With a core like that we at least get 1 more cup, maybe 2.

In the great scheme of "what-if" scenarios, I don't know if anyone understands just how close to being the team of the 1990s the Rangers came.

And not just through one move, through several near misses. Be it Lindros, or Arnott, or Shanahan, or not trading Weight or Amonte, or even Norstrom.

Any combination of those elements present an interesting range of possibilities.

But one of the biggest factors that we don't often talk about is Neil Smith. He was a different GM after 1994. I might even argue he was already rounding the bend starting with the Spring of 1993.

 

[CharlestownChiefsESC]

In the great scheme of "what-if" scenarios, I don't know if anyone understands just how close to being the team of the 1990s the Rangers came.

And not just through one move, through several near misses. Be it Lindros, or Arnott, or Shanahan, or not trading Weight or Amonte, or even Norstrom.

Any combination of those elements present an interesting range of possibilities.

But one of the biggest factors that we don't often talk about is Neil Smith. He was a different GM after 1994. I might even argue he was already rounding the bend starting with the Spring of 1993.

So many near misses lets not forget they could have had Sealane in 95 as instead of Robitille

 

[bernmeister]

Personally, I felt the Rangers won despite those deadline moves, not because of.

As for the other trade, you're thinking of Norstrom. That was another spectacularly bad trade. The 1994 deadline was the turning point for Smith as a GM. Until then, he had been viewed as a shrewd talent evaluator who won some serious lopsided trades. From the '94 deadline on, it was almost the opposite. And the deals he didn't pull the trigger on were the deals that would've almost certainly worked.

pt 1 - the deals
yeah, but imo if we would have won anyway and had more in the tank for successive campaigns, we should not have done those trades

but yeah, in spite of/despite, not because of
concur there

pt 2 Norstrom
yeah, thanks, Mattias if I remember
didn't want to butcher his last name and have people jump my ass and say I dropped name of a dept store.

 

[Steve Kournianos]

The problems with Amonte began in 1993 with the Leetch incident, plus he and Weight liked to party. Neither played a lick of defense in 1993, which is why Smith and Messier both wanted Tikkanen. Plus, they already had Kovalev, drafted Sundstrom and a young Graves. Amonte was brutal in 1994 and basically forced himself out with selfish play for the last coach you should play selfish for. Keenan didnt hate skill guys. He wanted them to play 200 feet like Roenick did for him in Chicago. Amonte was a cherrypicking forward who got exposed when he didnt have Messier and Graves covering for him.

Remember, Smith was already willing to part with Weight and Amonte anyways from the Lindros saga. The Hawks went nowhere with Amonte as their top wing, getting out of the 1st round once in his 9 seasons there.

What hurt the Rangers the most was Messier leaving and the impact it had in Leetch.

Trading Zubov and Nortstrom in a year span was the beginning of the end.