Jump to content
  • Join us — it's free!

    We are the premiere internet community for New York Rangers news and fan discussion. Don't wait — join the forum today!

IGNORED

John Davidson is a Rangers Lock


Phil

Recommended Posts

If JD were to come any big shake ups ? He didn't pick the GM or the coach and how long of a rope do they have ?

 

I dont think either are in jeopardy of losing their jobs.

 

But things can change very quickly. This could be a big summer with lots of moving parts that could impact Gorton, and such moves could put a spotlight on Quinn's ability and success using those pieces.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something about this is strange to me. What exactly has JD done with those other teams? He’s not the GM but neither St. Louis nor Columbus were that successful. Hell, Columbus hadn’t won a playoff round until this year. Hopefully this is just one of those jobs that doesn’t really matter. I don’t think Sather has been involved in quite some time.

 

I’m all for ranger family but not at the expense of winning or proper management.

 

Well, if his job is indeed to "establish the vision for the operation" that sounds like a pretty significant role to me.

I'm not sure if that was Sathers role, but if he's just stepping in for Slats without changing anything that would seem like more of a figurehead type of deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, but there are a lot of potential candidates that have done well elsewhere. But the Rangers have apparently just decided JD is their man without even talking to these individuals.

So it seems fair to assume that the main driver behind this decision is that he knows the MSG family and everybody likes JD.

Or to put it another way, would JD have been "a lock" based on his work in St. Louis and Columbus if he didn't have a history with the Rangers? It seems unlikely.

 

I mean this isn't a huge deal at all, but I find it interesting they've just decided on JD without talking to potential candidates.

 

Who are potential candidates though? JD brings clout/respect and experience. Hard to argue that where he's been, has pretty much done things right. They have built with youth, added pieces when necessary, and never really gotten taken on a trade.

 

Isn't the current Rangers regime already a bunch of pals and friends with long pasts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who are potential candidates though? JD brings clout/respect and experience. Hard to argue that where he's been, has pretty much done things right. They have built with youth, added pieces when necessary, and never really gotten taken on a trade.

 

Isn't the current Rangers regime already a bunch of pals and friends with long pasts?

There are a lot of people out there with great hockey minds that could do this job. The idea that JD is the only person in hockey suitable for the role is more than a little bit ridiculous.

The only reason JD is a lock is because of his connection with the Rangers. Without it he’d merely be one name on a list of candidates. It seems peculiar to me that his past with the Rangers elevated him to such a degree that speaking to other candidates is deemed unnecessary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, we kind of do because there has been no reports of them talking to anyone or even asking permission to do so. It seems unlikely the Rangers have interviewed or asked to interview 5 or so candidates without anyone picking up on it. It’s possible I suppose, but it’s a fair assumption to work from.

 

And I’m not sure on what basis JD is near the top of the list apart from being a member of the old boys club, which is kind of the point here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At this point it seems like you just have a personal bone to pick with the selection.

 

JD built successful teams in STL and CBJ (and if you don't think they're successful because they haven't made playoffs or had much success there, take a look at the laughing stock that team was before he got there).

 

The fact that he is familiar with the politics at MSG give him an advantage, I'm not sure why you're positioning it as a drawback. Did Detroit interview 10 people before hiring Yzerman?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are a lot of people out there with great hockey minds that could do this job. The idea that JD is the only person in hockey suitable for the role is more than a little bit ridiculous.

The only reason JD is a lock is because of his connection with the Rangers. Without it he’d merely be one name on a list of candidates. It seems peculiar to me that his past with the Rangers elevated him to such a degree that speaking to other candidates is deemed unnecessary.

 

Like who? I'm really not trying to be a jerk here, but who has the ability to run one of the most popular franchises in the sport? Why wouldn't his connection to the Rangers shoot him right to the top? I don't think he's part if some good ol boys club. JD kinda did things his way. JD left his cush job as an analysist with the Rangers and jumped right into a GM role. He didn't do too bad. He seems to do things his own way. If he didn't, I don't think he would have left here to begin with.

 

If you could name some names that deserve mention and what they've done to be recognized over a guy like JD, I'm all ears. But with how minimal it seems you feel about the impact of the the job, why do you think they should go with anything else but a big name with a connection to the organization? It's not like he's never been in the position he is said to be taking. He's done the job elsewhere and didn't do all too bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm nominating me for the GM job - yup 4EverRangerFrank!

 

1. I've been 'affiliated' with the club for over 50 years. (Take that JD!)

2. The NYR organization has already taken my stomach and most of my intestines, so why not have the rest of me?

3. I know my way around the organization too. I can navigate the new MSG like a well-trained field mouse. Beer? That way. Poke Bowl? Go this way. (Take that JD!)

4. I've built a winning team too. My son (Assistant GM) and I have become quite adept at navigating West Side Highway traffic and have learned the quickest route to the Meyers Garage. Understanding the ins-and-out of the neighborhood watering holes is a "good locker room guy" asset that will help endear me with the younger players as we conduct serious 'team bonding' sprints to the bar for refills.

5. And the money thing? Yeah, I can work for a whole lot less than JD. (Take that JD!)

 

:thumbs:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

At this point it seems like you just have a personal bone to pick with the selection.

 

JD built successful teams in STL and CBJ (and if you don't think they're successful because they haven't made playoffs or had much success there, take a look at the laughing stock that team was before he got there).

 

The fact that he is familiar with the politics at MSG give him an advantage, I'm not sure why you're positioning it as a drawback. Did Detroit interview 10 people before hiring Yzerman?

 

I don’t have a bone to pick with the selection. I’m not sure how you can come to that conclusion because I feel I’ve been very clear that it’s the process I’m questioning. If they’d interviewed 5 candidates and decided JD was their guy I’d have no issues at all with him getting the gig. Being familiar with MSG politics isn’t all negative of course, but this could have been an opportunity to bring in new blood and new ideas. The MSG way isn’t perfect. What if someone had better ideas? The problem is that they don’t know because they haven’t heard from anyone else before deciding JD is their guy. That’s all I’m saying.

I mean, even if you feel confident JD is the guy, what is there to lose from listening to the ideas of a few other bright minds? Maybe someone blows you away, maybe the process reinforces your initial idea about JD. Who knows?

Yzerman is a little bit different considering his track record and I’m not sure he’s comparable to JD.

 

I’ve made my point I think, you don’t have to agree with it. If you think deciding on JD without hearing what anyone else has to say is the way to do it that’s cool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t have a bone to pick with the selection. I’m not sure how you can come to that conclusion because I feel I’ve been very clear that it’s the process I’m questioning. If they’d interviewed 5 candidates and decided JD was their guy I’d have no issues at all with him getting the gig. Being familiar with MSG politics isn’t all negative of course, but this could have been an opportunity to bring in new blood and new ideas. The MSG way isn’t perfect. What if someone had better ideas? The problem is that they don’t know because they haven’t heard from anyone else before deciding JD is their guy. That’s all I’m saying.

I mean, even if you feel confident JD is the guy, what is there to lose from listening to the ideas of a few other bright minds? Maybe someone blows you away, maybe the process reinforces your initial idea about JD. Who knows?

Yzerman is a little bit different considering his track record and I’m not sure he’s comparable to JD.

 

I’ve made my point I think, you don’t have to agree with it. If you think deciding on JD without hearing what anyone else has to say is the way to do it that’s cool.

 

What about Yzerman's track record makes him superior to JD? Both built great teams that never won Cups. Yzerman never took a bottom feeder and made them competitive, so I'd actually say JD has the upper hand there, no?

 

What makes you think JD does things the "MSG way?" (And..what does that even mean?) He hasn't been here for 13 years and I'd actually argue that it's fairly evident that he doesn't do things the way Sather did, based on his track record.

 

I don't have a problem with the outcome, so I don't really care what the process was. There aren't a ton of people available. They talked to Yzerman, I wouldn't want Holland, McCrimmon was staying put...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yzerman's work with Tampa is seen as an absolutely outstanding job by virtually everyone in the industry. That's probably why the Rangers had him top of their list, and I'd imagine he'd be top of the list for any other organization looking to fill a similar post.

 

In any case, we're really not getting anywhere here tbh. I'm not hearing any counter arguments to my actual point. Why was it better to just go for JD without talking to anybody else? What could they possibly have to lose from hearing a couple of different ideas before settling on JD? I'm not sure why this is even worth debating, but I have no problem with people being happy with JD and not caring about the process that got them here. I'm sure I'll be happy with JD as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am sure that was decided after going through the process of all possible candidates.

If that was the case we'd have nothing to talk about. What's being reported is that there was no process. First Yzerman, and when he said no, JD.

There is obviously a chance they have interviewed several people and it hasn't been reported. The point was made on the assumption that what Brooks et al are reporting is in fact correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If that was the case we'd have nothing to talk about. What's being reported is that there was no process. First Yzerman, and when he said no, JD.

There is obviously a chance they have interviewed several people and it hasn't been reported. The point was made on the assumption that what Brooks et al are reporting is in fact correct.

 

Rumors and conjecture my friend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If that was the case we'd have nothing to talk about. What's being reported is that there was no process. First Yzerman, and when he said no, JD.

There is obviously a chance they have interviewed several people and it hasn't been reported. The point was made on the assumption that what Brooks et al are reporting is in fact correct.

 

I don’t remember the details with Yzerman. Think it was him or JD before he decided to return to Detroit. I don’t think we were even close to an offer at that point. We probably prompted Detroit to act.

 

I don’t see the big deal regarding the process for JD. He is not an inexperienced guy getting a shot because of name recognition. He already has a very good track record over many years in that role. He knows what New York is all about. Anybody else we would bring in would have many more questions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If that was the case we'd have nothing to talk about. What's being reported is that there was no process. First Yzerman, and when he said no, JD.

There is obviously a chance they have interviewed several people and it hasn't been reported. The point was made on the assumption that what Brooks et al are reporting is in fact correct.

 

Where are you reading that Yzerman was #1 on their list? I've never seen that and I seriously doubt that was the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where are you reading that Yzerman was #1 on their list? I've never seen that and I seriously doubt that was the case.

 

Still, the vacancy in the executive suite has created an opportunity for the Rangers to speak to an array of interested, qualified candidates with progressive agendas who might have caught Garden chairman Jim Dolan’s ear. This was an opportunity for ownership to listen to critiques of the organization from persons inside the industry. This was the chance for a fact-finding mission.

 

But other than reaching out to Yzerman, whom we’re told recently informed the Rangers that he had essentially committed to another endeavor, the Rangers have been idle on this front even as GM Jeff Gorton and his personnel people go about the critical business of scouting and are preparing for the organizational meetings that will commence at Sather’s Western White House on May 5. The Rangers apparently have identified their man and see no need to cast a wider net.

 

https://nypost.com/2019/04/19/rangers-all-in-on-john-davidson-gamble-that-now-must-work/

 

Reading that back it's definitely fair to say I'm jumping the gun claiming Yzerman was their #1. It merely says they talked to him, got a "no" and then attention turned to JD.

But, again, whether or not he was #1 or 2 isn't central to my point.

My point is the same as Larry's here. I'm not sure if that makes me feel any better about it truth be told.

 

I am sure that this discussion has run its course, however.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×
×
  • Create New...