« Everything Comes Up Rozsie For Rangers | Main | Do You Know the Way to Build San Jose? »

December 19, 2008


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Matty I have a feeling that Kovalchuk is sick and tired of being in Atlanta, but at the same time he has a good sportsmanship attitude and never shows that feeling.

"Local reaction to the Rangers losing out on Sundin"

I think we won!


As far as Kovalchuk is concerned, he is a franchise player. There is no way we will or can give up players that will help Atlanta put folks in the seats. And that is Atlanta's big problem. His cap hit is $6.4MM and becomes a UFA in the 10/11 season. If Atlanta can remain in Atlanta is a big question and if they lose him, just start packing the bags. The trades they need to make are for a few good forwards and a stable goaltender.

About these mid or late season signings: The NHL should pass a rule to prevent any of these things from happening. This idea that a player can sit out and then come back and play is bad for any sport, IMHO. If a player retires and then decides he wants to play again, let him do what Frave did, sign BEFORE the season begins. Maybe allow signings up to the 10th game of the season. There are enough prima donnas in the league as it is. Sundin gets all this attention, distracts the lockerrooms of many clubs, gets fans all fired up, has the talking heads all involved, just so some guy can make plenty of dough for only playing half the season. How about the team signs him, but lets him have a vacation for 35 games, at full pay? What do you think that would do the chemistry and lockerroom harmony? If a retired or unsigned player can't come to terms with any club by the 10th regular season game, he does not play in the NHL.

22-11-2 has what 10 SO points? 12-11-10 or something like that, is what their record really is, that's not very impressive. But they are in first. They need some subtractions and additions, but not sure if any are forthcoming.

It's the coaching. when a team only shows up to play half the time, when a team with the offensive players the Rangers have cannot score goals, when the PP is this abysmal, that's when it's time to look at coaching.

At this point Ranger fans have themselves convinced that Gomez and Drury are not worth the money because they are second and third line players. Not true. Both could be first line centers on many NHL teams, and good ones. That's one reason the Devils were so good - they had 2 #1 centers, one of whom was Gomez. Ditto Buffalo with Drury and Briere. But these players have been stuffed into a "defense first" system that, judging by the number of odd-man rushes yielded, is not a real system at all.

rangerbill94 Good point!

Just a quick thought before I go out the door but couldn't we sit someone(Voros) and maybe put Shanny in on the 4th line and PP???????Z


Why dont you do that sat for evey team in the leagie and then come back with the results.

FN pathetic how people just need a reason not to be happy.Enjoy the 1st place and stop coming up with dumb stats that dont matter

ANT pathetic is thinking they are playing good by looking at the standings. But you keep thinking that first place by getting 2 points in the shootout is an accomplishment. You run the numbers. I don't care about the other FN teams. And if you think Sather or Renney are fooled by those numbers than I guess you think they are dumb.It might get them to the playoffs along with 15 other teams. Winning in regulation or OT is a lot better sign. Hang on to the attitude little one, I'm not impressed. Stay happy.

Yes, our record would be more impressive if it wasn't for all the SO victories but I am pretty sick and tired with hearing/reading about it ... the point is that there IS a SO so it doesn't matter what the record would be without it because IT IS HERE! That's the bottom line ... I'm not happy because I still do not see Renney and/or Sather addressing the needs of our team ... Renney doesn't hold them accountable and Sather has, apparently, handcuffed the team for the next 2 yrs(at least) ... but enough with the "If not for the SO wins..." ... really ...

Matty sorry but SO wins are not holding them accountable. They are practicing penalty shots, and Lundqvist is getting those wins for the most part. It's now a part of the standings, but not a good measure for management to hang on to. If the playoffs had the same rules, then it might be a lot more meaningful. 22 points points won in regulation is much better than 22 won in shootouts, to exxagerate the points.

Hang on to the attitude little one, I'm not impressed. Stay happy

Lol woow what a comeback.

You run the numbers. I don't care about the other FN teams

That makes no sense at all.U complain how w/o shootouts our team wouldve been good why dont you look at everybody and then draw a conclusion ok little one

And yes i do think Sather is dumb.Renney not that bad yet.

Whats more inportant than the standings?After game #82 are they going to count what would the record be w/o shootouts nope dont think so.Team whos on top is the team that counts.


I am not saying that management and the coaching staff shouldn't look at the SO wins and NOT hold the team accountable for not playing hard to win in regulation or OT ... but what I *AM* saying is that I am SICK and TIRED of FANS continously going "If there wasn't a SO..." because guess what, there IS a SO so there is no "what ifs" ... that's plain and simple ...

Renney should hold them accountable for their play, for their lack of hustle, but he doesn't ... in fact he reinforces their lazy play by continuing to give a lot of ice time to the culprits and leaving Henrik out there when the team in front of him is clearly not trying ...

ANT glad your laughing. One more time which is the better team one that has 22 points from 11 regulation or Ot wins, or a team that has 22 points from SO wins ? They would both be at the top.

This team just does not have the tools or the system to win in the Spring, no way. We have the biggest and most important piece: the best goalie in the league. That gets you far, but you need a surrounding cast. This team doesn't show up to play on many nights, has no consistent finishers, is inept on the PP, and cannot handle speed. On choppy Garden ice we can keep the game nice and slow, but playing on the road against skilled teams, they blow right by us, outshoot us 10-2 in the first few minutes, and we're gone. If this team doesn't get the tools at the deadline to resist speed, they're going nowhere no matter how good Hank is. The answer never was some over-the-hill, overpaid, forward joining the league at mid-season. The missing piece is size and grit on the blueline. They need someone who will actually use their size and knock around the likes of Crosby, Ovie. Get a bruiser or no shot.

Agree with i,

Anyone else think this team is a house of cards? No where good enough to be a cup contender. So I think the pattern will hold like the last few years; get in the playoffs, and then not be good enough or deep enough to make it through, IMHO. We don't have the size, physical players, to go deep.

So are we happy with an inconsistent team (a theme that's run thru many years) or do we want a real chance at Winning the cup?

Watching the LA game on DVR and seems to me the only d you keep hearing about is Staal's hitting, Staal made a run. Why aren't there any other d men that do that? Why did potter not play this game? I think Renney does this to all the young players, the first year they come up. They sit alot and watch games and rarely get in. Seems like he could probably get Potter in a few games and let the kid play. Offers the team something different. (besides the handwaving, out of position, - 300 player who won't be named.)

i -- I'm with Ant and Matty on this one. You're clearly looking only at the Rangers and reaching a conclusion about them without looking at what is happening elsewhere. What do the Rangers and Devils, Philly and Pitt, Habs and Hawks, Detroit and San Jose all have in common? It's that each team, all in the top 12 in the league, has gone to OT or SO 8 to 12 times this season. Only two teams not in the top 12 in the NHL today have played more than 8 OT/SO games, while only two teams in the top 12 have played fewer than seven.

It seems that good teams get to OT and SO's more often than bad teams. And that makes sense. They have more of an ability to come back when they're behind to tie a game up late, and they have better goalies. Bad teams get beaten more easily so they don't last past regulation -- Tampa is the lone exception with its 2-9 OT/SO record. When a bad team has a bad game, they get blown out -- when a good team has a bad game, the limp into OT or a SO as the Rangers did in L.A.

So what happens once these teams get to OT and SO? You somehow come to the conclusion that the Rangers' 10-2 record is indicitive of something wrong. Tell that to Flyer and Hawk fans who see a six or a seven in the third column of the standings. They're not re-casting their teams' record to a pre-SO world to make them look worse than they actually are -- they're re-casting their teams' standing to see how much better they could be if only they could win some of those SO's.

Consider it a luxury that the Rangers can get to extra time and win extra points -- other teams are getting there and giving those extra points away. The Rangers certainly have issues that need to be addressed, no question about that -- but so do all of these other teams. At least the Rangers don't have to worry about shootouts.

Thanks Dubi, you've opened my eyes. I have to admit I was kind of in agreement with i. I kind of figured that, if you can't beat a team outright without the SO, you're not a very good team. I never looked at it the way you see it. If i doesn't change his mind after reading your post, then he's a lost cause. Great post, Dubi!

Dubi thanks for checkin up on the stats I was too lazy to do it lol

So glad. Hopefully Dawes emerges and all is well in Rangerland again.

The problem I see is that while the Rangers may win games via the shoot out what people are not seeing is that the Rangers are also giving away points in those wins.

It is not a 2 point win anymore but a 1 point win since the other guys are getting points as well. When you look at how the others in the conference and division have games in hand then helping others earn points will come back to haunt you.

"I" has a very valid point that too many people are not seeing. The record looks pretty right now but the teams behind the Rangers have games in hand, they are not winning via SO but in regulation.

The other thing that "I" left out is that most of those shootout wins are coming against the bottom of the NHL. IF the Rangers continue this trend in the second half then there is a very good chance they will find themselves passed in the standings by those who have games in hand.




Ah Uncle Larry trashing Sather, nice comedy coming from the same guy who called Zherdev lazy.

Oh and even better will be the joke called whatever punishment handed down to Cindy Crosby for his cheapshot to Marty Reasoner's groin (with his fist if you have not seen the tape).

So if sloppy seconds is worth 6 games then exactly what is a (sorry if someone is offended by this but) punch to the family jewels?

If anyone has interest in Tuesday's (12/23) game against Washington, please email me bmihans@yahoo.com as somethings come up and I can't attend. I have 2 tix available. Sorry Dubi...


The point we give away to the other team could also be an advantage. As you point out, we are giving one point to lesser teams. Look at the last 10 or so games on the schedule. We have plenty of tough games; NJ, MON, BOS, PITT, Philly. But many of the teams we will be competing against for home ice advantage will be playing those "lesser" teams. They will be fighting for the last playoff spot, making them a tough opponent for our competitors!

JESS thanks for the extra POINTS ;-) The NYR are taking & giving points, my point is any team winning in regulation is a better win than an OT or SO win. The NHL should change the point system to reward regulation wins. Then the 'evidence ' wouldn't be so backhanded and a loophole. I'm sure Renney understands it, while taking full advantage of it. ....Crosby didn't even drop his gloves and was the 3rd man in. Say what you want about Avery's antics, he's not a punk like Crybaby.......

Dubi, Dubi---just a bunch of rationalizationa about not getting Sundin, a guy who definitely would have made the Rangers a better team in the short term at least, but alas I think it was about more than the money. Mats is a very perceptive guy as I came to appreciate after watching him interviewed after many Leaf games. I believe there were major problems in the Ranger locker room last year and hypothesized so, and I believe there are still problems. People get down on Drury but here is a guy who played exceptionally well elsewhere as did Gomez, who has become a lazy turnover type guy. Look at what the Devils are doing. Why? Because they have a great coach, one we should have hired. No, I is the one who is right, this is a team that is a fragile house of cards no matter what their record is, and Sundin would have really helped in the room, let alone on the ice, but he probably sensed the type of guy Slats is and wanted no part of it. We'll never know what turned him away but it wasn't money like Brooks and others think.

BONES Sundin wanted to play here, but there were too many obstacles thanks to Sather. And I'm not sure how he would fit in this 'system' and extremely pc chemistry. He figured besides the $, he was better off elsewhere. They didn't have to get rid of more than 1 player to put him on their roster. Some NYR fans need to make him the bad guy by claiming it was all about the money. He got the same offer Messier took 10 years ago. He supposedly said he didn't want to create so much turmoil to join the NYR. He would have been a big improvement. NEXT!

>>> The NYR are taking & giving points, my point is any team winning in regulation is a better win than an OT or SO win. <<<

So are the Sharks, Wings, Penguins, Devils, Habs, Hawks teams that you consider better than us?? Yes? Well all those teams have gone to SO more than 8 times ... Devils are 7-1 in SO's in fact ...

The point that *I* was making, Jess and I, is that the SO affects EVERY team in the League ... some teams use it to their advantage and some don't ... I am not saying ... oh look our team is great look at all the wins without taking into consideration how they got those wins ... how they got those wins is the MAIN reason I am concerned about how our team can perform come playoff time if they get there ... HOWEVER my point is that I am not going to be like "Well if we didn't have the SO then our record would be ... " because that's BS ... we have a SO, there is no what ifs about it ...

BTW Sundin gave an interview with a Swedish publication and said that the Rangers were never an option and that people thought they were because of some of his friends on the team and the poker thing in MSG in which he had a brief meeting with Glen Sather but that they never made him an offer ... or so he says ... so either he's lying or we were never really in the running ...

Either way, I don't care, I didn't want him

The comments to this entry are closed.