« Rangers 4 on 4 Up First This Month | Main | Rangers 4 on 4 -- Complete! »

January 31, 2007


Makes me wonder if this is what Shanahan and Jagr were talking about after the Shanahan goal. Jagr looked upset. At first I thought it was because Shanahan got the credit instead of him. Did anyone have a similar thought?


Absolutely. It was my immediate thought. I have two children. My younger daughter was the champion pouter. Jagr looked like a pouting little kid. Santa gave Shanny the shiny red firetruck instead of him. I know pout when I see one.

You think Jagr was pouting because he didn't get the goal and Shanny did or could it be that Shanny told him that he's sick and tired of the zebras not calling any penalties on him (Jagr) and he's going to get vocal about it? Either one would explain his pouting.

Unless your thoughts are that Shanny was just covering Jagr's pouting over the goal and used the bad zebra story to hide that.

Thoughts from who was there. Margaret??

Jagr pouting because Shanahan got credit for the goal? Oh, puh-leeze! Shanahan is wondering why the refs are prejudiced against Jagr -- his own damn fans are prejudiced against him. I'm ashamed, truly ashamed.

dubi once again right on the point

Sorry but you just knew the Rangers were going to lose this game... Z

Dubi, I'm not sure it's something that I should feel shame about. These are some facts. 1. Sam Weinman has already reported on a small feud between Jagr and Shanahan. 2. The public displays of friendship that we saw between J. and S. at the beginning of the season have completely disappeared. 3. When the camera was trained on Jagr and Shanahan after the Shanahan goal, Jagr looked not only upset but upset at Shanahan (check the tape). It was curious. It's also curious that Shanahan should come out at this particular point in time to identify a common enemy and stick up for Jagr.

I think Rangers fans owe more to Jagr than any other player since Messier -- in terms of bringing a winning attitude to a team that forgot how to win. I'm probably Jagr's biggest fan (and suspect he's going to go on a tear soon). So we don't need to go there. I do, though, want to know what's up.

Are you all serious? Jagr was upset at people hooking and slashing him that whole shift and then i'm sure he was upset they were reviewing the goal. I think people will make up anything to cause some petty nonsense. Jagr and shanahan have different playing styles but they get a long fine. And even if they dont, are you kidding me that you think jagr would shoot angry glances at shanny for scoring? paahh--lleassee. Also, i'm a little shocked that you are comparing anything jagr did to messier. Jagr brought his talents to the team but i cant think of a time he really acted like a true captain such as messier.

The mere suggestion that Jagr was "pouting" because Shanny got credit for the goal instead of him disgusts me. As has already been suggested, he could have been upset that the goal was being reviewed. He could have been upset that he was hooked and held all damn night. He also had trouble with his new skates all night (and missed parts of a few shifts as a result), and he could have been upset about that. But no, he's pouting because someone else got credit for a goal. Give me a break. Do you really think he gives a toss who scores the goals, as long as the team wins? If you do, you know absolutely nothing about Jaromir Jagr.

And Tyuts, despite his protestations that it was not intention, Sam put himself directly in the middle of a story, catching both guys unaware of things the other had said and putting them on the spot. My guess is that if he detected annoyance from either one, it was probably directed at him rather than their teammate.

I'm not even going to address the speculation about a Jagr/Shanahan problem. But Shanahan's rants against the Jagr double-standard should be expanded - through in Petr Prucha in there. You can count on 2 hands the high and late hits he's taken over the last month, without a single call that I can remember.

The real reason this game was lost, to me, was that the team did not display the speed and work ethic of the last two games. Yes, the goalie was better, but how many shots from in close did the Rangers generate? How many rebounds? How many shifts did the rangers win the physical battles?

I'm not gunna say that the Hollweg benching was a mistake, because I believe he will be back in the lineup on Saturday, but in a game when we needed a physical element, he was sorely missed.

Finally, after Cullen took his penatly late, Renney started the PK with Betts and Hall. I mean, I know its a longshot to score a last minute SH goal, but what could possibly be the reason for not using every second to try?

Are you all forgetting that this is the same player who, when credited with the goal that would have broken Adam Graves' record, rightly pointed out to the officials that it was not him, but Straka who scored the goal? That's hardly the kind of person that would "pout" over another player getting credit for a goal instead of him. Give me a break.

OK, I'm now on the "fire Renney" bandwagon. But not for the reason you'll may think. Hopefully, we will have a team with more young players on it. Pock makes a mistake and doesn't see the ice again, Renney said it had nothing to do with his mistake and I believe him. He did not play any young players, except maybe Prucha, after the Sundin goal. This coach CAN NOT coach young, developing players. That kind of coach puts the guy back on the ice on his next shift. It's the way you build confidence and trust. Instead, Renney goes dirctly to his veterans, the ONLY players he has faith in. Renney is not the man for a youthful team and it doesn't matter if his teams are fighting for a playoff spot or in a complete rebuild. Maybe Shoney really is the right guy, but if this teams plans are to have Staal, Dubinshy, Callahan, Sauer, Immonen, Korpikoski, Baranka, Dawes and Sanguinetti in our lineup within the next two years and others in junior hockey ready in 3-5 years, then Renney is the WRONG guy!

Renney is the wrong guy and has proved he is an advocate of young player destruction. When you have AHL type players on your team like the Rangers do, what's the harm in trying some of the guys who are playing real well in Hartford. Not everybody is going to be a Brendl, Jeff Brown etc. If they are, they would be found out real fast.

Why was Girardi and Pock benched in the 3rd period? Malik and Rachunek make mistakes and Girardi and Pock pay for it?? Great coahing Tom.

Dubi, do you see the light yet about Renney's coaching inability or do you still think he will grow into the job like Ruff has??

I questioned the possibilities about Jagr's pouting and based on what I have seen from him, I think mhurley is wrong and the pouting was due to the fact that illegal infractions against Jagr are not being called by the refs.

Anybody else besides margaret think Jagr was pouting about the goal??

you people are crazy who thinks Jags was mad at Shanny for the goal.Jags know he wont break any records this season.the only thing on his and shannys minds are the cup.

RangerBill- I agree that last night Renney pulled the plug on using the young guys, but I don't think that it's fair to categorize him as a coach who never puts young players in positions to fail or succeed. I think he has been much more inconsistent this year, but I remember last year when games were on the line he had the young guys out there after a mistake. I remember thinking how refreshing it was that the kids weren't glued to the bench after developmental mistakes.
This year he has gone back and forth, perhaps feeling the pressure to make the playoffs.

Okay, I have to get this off my chest. I used to think all Canadian broadcasts of hockey games were so refreshing and superior to the American versions. While this is true of most, last night was laughable. Here are some highlights:

1. Keith Jones loses all credibility in the pre-game where he mentions that the key guy for the Rangers you never hear about is Marek malik. He claims Marek is built for the new NHL (They showed his Shootout goal) and that his size was the reason for his success. He then showed the stats, showing that over the past three seasons, Malik is the number 1 (#1) +/- leader. Better than Lidstrom, with +81. It just shows that stats aren't everything. They also said that Malik hadn't taken a shootout since like it was a crime, or the Rangers weren't taking advantage of a secret weapon.

2. Play by play guys (Heals was one of them)mentioned that Girardi was in the lineup only because Roszival, our "best defenseman" was injured.

3. Someone said that Ortmeyer suffered from a "brain aneurism."

4. Cullen had been a "pleasant surprise for the Rangers this year."

5. The Leafs homers all claimed that Shanny kicked it in.

6. "Raycroft was better than the other goalie"- a direct quote at the end of the game. Technically, yes, but it kind of dismissed Lundqvist's play.

7. Overall sloppy play by play, with incomplete sentences which put the next sentence out of context.

Disapointing since I usually love the Canadian feeds.

The suggestion that Jags was pouting about not scoring is so utterly ridiculous, which only reinforces what Dubi (and I threw in my 2 cents) was talking about yesterday. Dubi mentioned that Shanny may have been responsible for Immo's demotion and someone asked if there was anything on record that proved it. No one ever wants proof of Jagr's behavior, they just create it and make it fact. Jagr cannot be everything for everyone. Can't we just appreciate what he does bring to this team? He is what he is and we would be much worse off without him, even if we brought up the entire Wolfpack roster in his place.

Colorado Mark, that someone was me. Reason I asked if there was any proof that Shanahan was responsible for Immo's departure was I hadn't read it anywhere nor heard it discussed until Dubi's comment. Jagr's pouting last night has been widely discussed and I have made my opinion on that clear.

Glad you liked my "chad" joke and hope to continue entertaining you in future...probably when the Rangers make me smile again.

"Sorry but you just knew the Rangers were going to lose this game... Z"

I had high hopes in the beginning, we were physical and had pretty good motion, good shot totals but when Sundin scored, yeah, I knew it was lights out.

THe Leafs won because of Raycroft period. I'm so sick and tired of the Rangers making these adverage to below adverage goalie look like all stars.

Tyuts, at least your comments were open-ended, I give you that. But as so many have commented in the interim, there were a lot of reasons for Jagr to be unhappy at that particular moment. Why would you think he'd be unhappy about setting up a goal? And I believe Sam has been pretty clear that there was no friction between Jags and Shanny, that he had just caught them by surprise with his questions.

Speaking of Sam, have you seen the comments on his blog from last night and today? This guy has busted his butt to get fans more information than they ever had in a timelier fashion then ever before possible, and he's getting roasted for not taking up their cause of roasting the Rangers. That's the way to encourage someone. And some brave soul chose to use that forum to comment about this site -- come on over here and take me on directly if you feel so strongly about it. I promise -- I won't bite your head off. I may make you want to bite it off yourself, but I won't do it for you.

Lenny, one game is not going to change my mind about the risks of letting Sather choose the next coach and setting the program back two more years, especially a game that was decided by one bad break (the first Leaf goal), one good play (White intercepting that pass and making a great pass of his own), and "Blame Canada" officiating. Renney didn't bench Pock for his bad play, he shortened his line-up to three lines and four D for the duration. On the one hand, I'd have liked to see Pock and Girardi continue. On the other hand, I was glad to be rid of Hall and Hossa for half a period.

Also, to answer your question about Immonen, I've already posted the information at this site several times. I hadn't thought about CO Mark's point of view of asking for proof, but it struck a chord, for sure. I don't believe he was aiming the remark at you for asking for proof re: Immonen, he was using it to contrast how so many people just to conclusions about Jagr without looking for proof (despite so much proof to the contrary posted here and elsewhere).

Saget -- good point about Prucha, but I disagree with you about the Rangers' effort -- looked to me like it was there, but was denied by Raycroft and the refs. Good call on the late PK -- I noticed that too and was scratching my head. It looked like he wanted those guys to get the puck and get it deep so that he could get Lundqvist off and Jagr's line out, but that was a huge miscalculation -- lost a lot of time, and wouldn't the more highly skilled first line stand a better chance of getting the puck back than Betts and Hall? You betcha!

I'd also like to add that the lack of line matching hurt the Rangers last night. I asked both Jagr and Renney about why they were content to let the Leafs get the match-ups they wanted so freely during a road game. I was particularly vexed about why the hottest line, Cullen's, was allowed to face Sundin all night, therefore having to focus so much on defense, and why Jagr had to go against Gill all night, while Shanahan's line, as inept as it now is with Betts and Hossa on it, could do nothing against Toronto's lesser players, much to the Leafs' delight. I didn't get satisfactory answers from either -- Jagr shrugged off Gill, saying he could handle him (apparently not), and said his name was Jagr not Renney so it was not his job to match lines; Renney meanwhile said he was content with the match-ups as they were and was more concerned about rolling his lines. A little juggling could have made a difference, especially in forcing a different look upon Raycroft and the Leafs (and the refs).

Can someone explain to me why we didn't pull Lundqvist with the faceoff at center ice (Leafs side of the ice) after Cullen's penalty? At least it would have been five-on-five skaters. I was pulling out my hair (what's left) as the Leafs passed it around, going back into their zone, as Lundqvist remained on the ice. Any thoughts?

Dubi, good point about not wanting Sather to pick another coach, his track record isn't that good, is it? With Sather's record, the next guy could be worse than Renney. Has to start with getting rid of Sather first, that's why I'm so frustrated about the future.

By the way, I was one of those on Sam's blog asking him to cut the cutesy stuff and do some real reporting for a change. I do appreciate the work he does but meant it as a wake up call. It might have been harsher than intended but Ranger frustration on my part led to that.

I certainly agree that if someone has a problem with you, they should express it here right to your face and not on somebody elses site. There are exceptions of course, when the site you are critical of bans you is the big exception.

You know that I have always take you on here. Thanks for not taking it personal and banning me. Speaking of taking you on, you know it's a waste of time to argue with me because I'm always right and you're always wrong. :)))

Watching the Rangers play last night was totally frustrating. That move by Nylander on the PP was RIDICULOUS. Renney should have sat him on the end of the bench. Jones assessment of Malik was indeed a joke, as was the present of many AHL players such as Hossa, Orr etc. All this talk about Immonen who stinks when the guy who really should come up is Helminen. Put him with Hollweg and Ortmeyer and watch the energy flow. Rangers management is just plain stupid. and well the coaching speaks for itself. The most exciting thing for me is the Wolf Pack and how well those kids are playing.

You see a lot of Wolfpack games bones?

Lenny -- that's funny, my wife always tells me how I'm always right and she's always wrong.

I just watched a tape of the game, and I can't for the life of me understand the reaction to the Jagr-Shanahan conversation after the goal. Jagr says something to Shanny, nodding his head, Shanny says something back, then Shanny turns and says something to someone else while Jagr continues to stare out at the ice the way he was doing before. Jagr spoke first -- what exactly do you think he said that might lead you to believe that he was sulking or that he wanted that goal?

Just before Rachunek was called for boarding O'Neill, O'neill interfered with Rachunek badly chasing down a puck, knocking him down into the boards while they were still five feet or more away from the puck. On the "penalty", O'Neill saw Rachunek coming and turned his back to him to brace himself. The real penalty on that sequence was not called, the penalty that was called was not a penalty at all.

After Antropov high sticks Ortmeyer, the whistle blows -- then Sundin elbows Prucha, Antropov hits Prucha high, Ortmeyer pushes Antropov just as Prucha pushes him back, Antropov punches Ortmeyer in the face, and Sundin puts Prucha in a headlock. The bona fide penalties in there -- Antropov high stick, Sundin elbow, Prucha roughing, Antropov roughing, Sundin roughing. At the very least, the post-whistle scrum should be even, with Antropov getting the original call for a Ranger power play. The actual calls -- Antropov high stick, Prucha roughing.

Throughout the game, the Leafs routinely interefered off draws, finished checks several seconds after the puck was gone (the standard is one second after), and interfered with players all over the ice -- routinely, never once called. I looked for the Rangers doing that, and I only saw one instance of the same type of interference -- that's it. The officiating in this game was exactly what you always see when the Rangers play a team from Canada. It's a travesty.

I know you guys like Pock better than Rachunek and Malik -- I do too. But as much as you want to blame Malik for that too many men, he was skating up along the boards, not going toward the bench, when Pock jumped on way too early -- it was Pock's fault, not Malik's. And as much as you want to blame Rachunek for the Sundin breakaway, he made a good pass attempt and it was Pock's responsiblity to cover Sundin.

I agree that Pock made the mistake on the delay of game penalty and the game winning goal. What I find sad though is these are the mistakes of a guy who is not game ready because Renney makes him sit in the press box most nights and benches him every time he makes a mistake. If the veteran D-men got the same treatment, the team would play most shifts with 5 forwards. Renney should know that its better to experience growing pains in the first half of the season than the second half. Unfortunately, he already messed this up.

Renney was punishing Pock. I do not believe him when he says he was just shortening his bench. How do you shorten your bench when your down a goal and not use the more offensive minded Pock over Malik (who by the way looks like he is skating SLOWER and SLOWER each passing game)??

Granted Pock did not have a great game and probably played himself out of the final minutes. But that is EXACTLY when you want a risky, pinching d-man out on the ice. Renney again amazes me with his inability to use his lineup effectively. And worse, he seems to know the right course and then CHOOSE the different path.

You know, none of this would be the biggest deal if Malik was not playing. I would not even say that Pock is deserving of all the praise he gets here sometimes. But Malik playing over Pock is just plain stupid. I'd rather lose with Pock trying to do something out there, than lose watching Malik somehow skate slower than Adam Hall. Malik was slow in the beginning of the season, but his skating is MUCH worse since his groin injury.

I felt Rachunek should have gotten the puck in deep on the Sundin gaola as Jagr Straka and Nylander were all deep in the offensive zone.

It was a 5 man error and i'm not blaming one guy alone.

Dubi, you seem to be in the business of defending the Ranger problems. Namely, Renney, Jagr, Malik, Rachunek, etc. anyone reading your post comments and replies would take away the impression that you are a shill for Ranger management.

I know you deny that, but I think your words show otherwise. your impassioned defense of Renney the last week or so really spits in the face of fans who see his incompetence daily. Just like the fans in Vancouver saw his incompetence in his only other NHL coaching try.

Julie, there's a difference between being objective and being a shill for Rangers management. And if that's what you consider Dubi to be, you obviously haven't been reading very long.

Julie, did you read my post called "Memo Mania" from Jan 17th? How about any of my posts from Jan 10-12, when Renney went on a tirade after a bad loss to the Islanders and the Rangers responded by falling behind 5-0 to Ottawa in their next game? Did you read my Jan 19th post, "All Quiet on the Rangers Front -- Too Quiet"? How about "2003 Draft Runs Deep, Except in New York" on Jan 24th? How about "Identity Crisis Looms for New Line Combos" on Jan 27th? That was where I wrote, "If the Rangers really use the lines that were seen in practice Friday there are only two possible scenarios -- bad and not bad. It's hard to imagine an outcome that can be uncategorically characterized as good."

You must not have read, "Whichever Way They Go, We'll Be There" from Jan 23rd, in which I wrote, "How will the Rangers, struggling to gel this season, respond to this year's All-Star break? Will they come in and find some sort of chemistry at just the right time and go into the post-season on an upward trend? Or will they crash and burn the way Ranger teams have done for seven seasons prior to last season (eight if you include last season's spring nosedive)? We don't have the answers right now."

I don't have to deny what you think about me -- my record speaks for itself. I have not defended a single Ranger problem, I have pointed them out. Try to go through everything that I have writter and see if you can come up with a case of me being a shill for Brendan Shanahan, the most popular Ranger right now? You can't -- I'm the ONLY writer anywhere who has dared to criticize him.

I understand why you think the way you do, though -- it's because I have written very passionately that firing Tom Renney is not going to solve anything if Glen Sather gets to choose the next coach, and I've defended Jaromir Jagr from people who hold him to different standards than they hold other players, say, Brendan Shanahn for example. And you hold a difference of opinion. I have debated these issues with readers here who hold different opinions, and I don't believe anyone has accused me of being a shill or apologist -- until now.

After the Atlanta game, when all the reporters were asking about other things, I asked everyone about the power play not being able to win games for the Rangers -- and finally Shanahan told us what he really thought about it. Since then, every reporter has phrased the question exactly the way I did -- why can't the power play win games for the Rangers? You may have read Jagr's comments after the Garden game against Boston about Renney's line matching -- I was the one who asked him the question about it, and I asked him and Renney about it last night, challenging them about why they let a road team come in and get the match-ups they wanted so freely.

You can say what you want about me, but what I've written speaks for itself, and what I've written reflects the tag line that appears along the top of every issue of Blueshirt Bulletin -- "Independently Covering New York's Hockey Team" with an emphasis on "independently" (and if you don't believe me, I'll give you the phone number of the Rangers' PR department and they can tell you why they treat me, the "defender of their problems" and "management shill" as you put it, like an afterthought).

In the meantime, I welcome you to share your opinions with me and my readers, regardless of whether I agree with them or not. You may know that the only criteria for commenting here is to maintain a level of respect in your choice of language for the people you are debating with and the people you are debating about.

Good for you Julie, not what you posted but the fact that you took my advice and confronted Dubi directly. Agree or disagree with him as he said as long as it's respectful you'll be heard.

Wish other sites were like that.

By the way Dubi, didn't you mean the other way around regarding that comment about your wife. You better correct that or I see Divorce Court coming up. :))

I am not talking about your BB articles at the top of the page. I am talking about your responses to posters in the comments section.

your true feelings come through in those responses. they are impassioned defenses of Renney and Jagr, even to the point of telling someone they should be ashamed to criticize Emperor Jagr, as though he is some kind of untouchable icon on ice.

I'm just about over the whole NHL thing due to the ridiculous officiating. The Prucha penalty where there should have been about 4 penalties between the two teams (not counting the original high stick) or zero penalties (except for the high stick) was just awful. They seriously need to start fining the refs for that kind of officiating. It really makes me want to not watch games anymore it is that bad.

Also, I wanted to add that I know that you are not connected to the Ranger management in any way. What I meant is that your responses defending Renney and Jagr jibe with the Ranger company line, so your shilling in the comment section is your own beliefs, and it just happens to be the same as Dolan or Sather would feed us.

In short, you agree with the company line on many fronts, and that is disturbing given the awful performance of this team since the Olympics ended.

Julie, I'm not assigned to be a Dubi defender but he does raise a valid point. Let's first agree that Renney is a terrible coach. I know that's the way I feel. But if he gets fired, who appoints the next coach? None other that the resident genius (thanks Mark) with the permanent stoogie in his mouth (probably goes to sleep with it, hopefully lit!!).

His record for hiring competant coaches, among other things, is terrible. If he fired Renney, most likely would get a coach that's worse, only possible with Sather at the helm. I haven't heard Dubi praise Sather, in fact just the opposite so the first move is to fire Sather but Dolan won't do that since he knows nothing about hockey.

Amazing how the press zings Thomas (Knicks GM) but gives Sather a free ride. Need to start there first!!

that does not defend it, lennynyr. It is called accountability. you must hold Renney accountable, and if a worse coach succeeds him, then we can go after him as well.

But as long as Dolan and Sather are not going anywhere, and we can't do much about it, we must start with the level that we can affect, the coach.

Julie, I'm afraid you have things turned around a bit -- if I was a shill for management, the softballs would be on the front page, where everyone sees them, and the hardball would be hidden in the comments section, not vice versa. Anyway, read back my most recent comments entries, tally up how many times I defend Ranger problems (actual problems, not speculative ones like Jagr pouting over a Shanahan goal, Renney breaking up successful lines when he hasn't actually done so, or what some other coach would do if he was Ranger coach) vs. how many times I criticize them, and let me know how I come out. If you do manage to come up with anything, it will probably be just some small difference opinion, not a systematic pattern of me shilling for the Rangers (those who know me from back in the day are probably chuckling mightily over that one!).

You also have the shame thing turned around too -- I didn't say that people who criticize Jagr should be ashamed, I said that *I* was ashamed that some fans jumped to the conclusion that Jagr was peeved about Shanahan scoring a goal when there were several other obvious scenarios readily at hand. If you'd like to crucify me for defending Jagr from accusations that he was pouting over Shanahan getting a goal that he thought he should get, please, go right ahead -- I'll just let your words stand against mine and let others judge. I'm pretty confident how that's going to turn out.

I'm having a hard time understanding how defending Renney, Jagr, Prucha, Betts, Ortmeyer, and Hollweg while criticizing Sather, Shanahan, Nylander, Rachunek, Hossa, and Hall and remaining neutral about Maloney, Malik, Rozsival, and the rest of the players makes me a shill, or makes me anything other than someone who holds some opinions that differ from yours and from others while agreeing with yet others.

your impassioned defense of Renney, and the lame excuse that "we might get someone worse", puts you squarely against the fans.

I repeat, your defense of a guy who has led the Rangers to Columbus-like mediocrity, since the olympics ended, is ridiculous.

I don't mind you calling me lame or ridiculous -- I take it as a sign of surrender when that's all someone has left in their arsenal. But if you persist in using that kind of language with anyone else, your comments will be deleted or edited as per this web site's policy.

In the meantime, as much as I'd like to continue this, I have our live online chat coming up at 7:00 that I have to prepare for. Comments are going to be moderated from now until the end of the chat, so your postings will not appear until I approve them. I will approve any comments posted to this thread without prejudice, and consider my responses after the chat.

No comments will be approved for the chat thread until 7:00.

Julie, please stop acting as if you speak for all Ranger fans. I don't know of a beat writer or blogger who's done a better job championing Ranger fans than Dubi. Suggesting he's "squarely against the fans" is downright laughable.

Dubi/Lenny- Dubi, you were right on with what I was trying to say about the Shanahan vs. Jagr expectations from the fans and just like the childrens game "Telephone", information gets changed little by little and then it gets repeated and eventually becomes fact. So many posters have mentioned that Jagr dictates the lineup that it is not even considered a subject to debate. If anyone denies it, they are shot down as a shill.

Julie, you lose credibility with every post. You aren't even listening to anything Dubi says. You are just saying the same thing again and again. "Squarely against the fans"? Speak for yourself. I don't think Renney is perfect by any means, but I am not convinced that a coaching change at this juncture would do much good. I must be a shill (even though I have gone against Renney for playing Malik, the treatment of Kaspar, the lack of playing time for Pock, Dawes and Immonen, calling up Isbister after one game for Cally, not changing the Power Play, inconsistent treatment of players). If that's your definition of Shill, then I guess my dictionary is wrong.

Those of you following this thread -- not sure if you caught the news in the Rangers 4 on 4 thread that was recently posted about Malik on IR and Lampman up from Hartford.


I've debated with Dubi all the way back to Rangers Fan Central and my beef with him was always how negitive he was regarding the Rangers. Frankly, as the team has moved more in the direction of rebuilding (which he advocated for a long time), he has been less outspoken. But a "shill of management"? I can't think of anyone who reports on the Rangers less likely to be a shill then him.

This arguing is really getting boring....Z

The instructions were clear, pollmi01 -- "be respectful of our panelists, your fellow commenters, and the subjects we discuss. Comments that do not follow this sole guideline will not appear." You insulted the professional integrity of a great reporter, you wanted to demean a Ranger player by calling him a girl's name, and in your complaint here (since deleted) you conveniently omit whom you compared Tom Renney to, which I shall not repeat (and I will delete if you repeat it and ban you completely). If you believe that falls within the confines of "respectful", then please do not participate on this site anymore -- and if you are a Blueshirt Bulletin subsciber, I will gladly refund your money. I want to attract meaningful participants to our panel discussions, and comments like yours only cause them to want nothing to do with us. Yours, by the way, were the ONLY comments I had to edit. Congratulations!

Hey "Dubi"- thanks again for censoring me and taking my stuff off the site. Very professional. For the record, i made an allusion, Dubi. I never said x = y. It was to make you think about how deluded people can be on all levels and how once they're so involved in a situation, they need to step back and realize what they're doing and be accountable. From Renney...to the lowest...to the highest of all beings. Renney is NOT a development coach. Pure and simple. And the fact that you have to delete my posts asking for a little professional courtesy, shows you run a very very (too) tight ship here. You can say- don't post here, and i usually don't. I find it ridiculous that you can say this is a messageboard and then censor people who don't call you out (by name at least), don't curse, don't insult other posters. It's going a little too far when you censor someone for calling the great Rachunek- Carol. He's a stupid hockey player making $900 K this year. I'm assuming that's more than you and i make combined. Why are we protecting him from what some idiot (me) says on some messageboard? Does calling him a feminine name (certainly not a curse or anything), demean him? My god- it's not like prospective G.M.s come here and will devalue him based on that. I'm sure this post will be thrown away like the rest of 'em, but it's truly borderline Fascist to behave like you are. Stop people who are going over the line. I'm a passionate Ranger fan- and if you want 'meaningful' participants, i certainly qualify. I'm at 10 games a year, i watch all others, I've been a diehard for over 15 years. calling someone a girl's name or calling a reporter a "company man" - why are these things over the line? Gimme a break. But see- you're not going to let this post see the light of day, so who will agree with me? Obviously, no one; therefore, i seem like a bafoon. People are allowed to disagree and question everything. Same goes for you questioning me. Good day, DUBI DUBI do.

Hell, a good debate is fine as long as people don't get personal and make personal insults. I quit both RFC & the Cafe because quite frankly the moderators exercised very little control over the site and even engaged in insulting themselves on one occassion(referring to posters on the site as idiots). This is the only thing in my mind which constitutes going over the line. Calling a player a girls name is inconsequential. But when people start calling other posters F....ing idiots or scumbags with no reaction then I leave. I havn't seen that here yet. Lenny--- no I don't watch Wolf Pack games but I watched Helminen play several times on TV when he was with Michigan and he's got NHL wheels and plays all out. He was derided here earlier in the year as a non NHLer but if given a chance I think he'd surprise a lot of people. Skating is the name of the game and Helminen can skate circles around Immonen.

The comments to this entry are closed.