Nash for Picks in the 2018 Draft?

[Rangers4Life]

why bring up Leetch,he wasn't a number one overall

 

Poor reading comprehension I suppose.

[Sod16]

Looking at that '66 Draft, it's clearly a joke.

 

Incidentally, if they had had a real draft in 1966, there was a guy from Prairie Sound, Ontario and the Oshawa Generals who turned 18 that year. Blonde hair. He later wore No. 27 for the Bruins but quickly switched to, I believe, No. 4. I understand he turned out to be a pretty fair mobile defenseman. The Rangers finished last in 65-66 and would have gotten him. The world would have been a different place! North Korea would be peaceable.

[The Dude]

Do you watch Columbus every night and know who is doing what other than stats? I watch them when their on and I’m able to do so. I see them every time they play the rangers I know enough. That said I could careless what plagues them because I have zero interest in that team. Also they are one of about 14 possible playoff teams out of the east. For some reason they are brought up like they matter anymore then the others. Why? So the rangers are as good as Columbus maybe better according to whomever. So what? I watch as much hockey as I can but I go out of my way to either go to or watch every game involving the rangers.

 

I can pretty much guarantee nobody on here watches every teams every game. You’re point is ridiculous and just trying to bait? It’s exactly posts like this that have no point other than to cause confrontation that brings any discussion to a halt.

 

I'm seriously not baiting you. I'm trying to get you to kinda chill out on the name calling labeling and wise remarks you make about others opinions.

 

I don't watch any Columbus games, yet I still know they have been one of the better teams of the conference up until recently. They were super hot and unbeatable. They have had some injuries to key players, and some under performers up to this date. Their goalie was unfreakingbeatable for about two months.

 

I know this without watching every game. I pay attention to the rest of the league. Maybe you don't care to, but if you feel your opinion is more valid without doing so, over others who semi disagree with your opinion to a point, I don't know where to go with you from here.

 

I don't get how you can claim that it's a definite that the Rangers aren't a contender, when you aren't into actually gauging the competition..

 

Im not here to talk shit or start fights. We are trying to rid the board of that crap. I'm not above talking wise or taking jabs, but I pay the price for such things much like every one else.

 

So, please discuss instead of getting defensive and claiming I'm goading you.

 

If you have no interest in the competition, how can you be confident in your opinion that the Rangers aren't contenders? Honest, serious question.

 

Nothing to do with Columbus making a trade VS the Rangers making a trade. The point is Columbus is one of the better teams in the east. The Rangers aren't very far behind if at all behind and that is with many more issues with the roster. How are they not? There not any worse than one of the easts better teams.

 

And again. Most of us think they should trade Nash and Grabner in the right circumstances, ie they keep playing like they have been in '18. Come off the' everyone is picking on me' train and have a normal discussion without calling people and their opinions, names.

[Fatfrancesa]

Fine but I never said I only watched Columbus 3 or 4 Times. Never. What I said is that I could careless what Columbus does at the deadline because the question posed to me was that should Columbus be sellers too. My point was that I don?t watch them every night like I do the rangers. I of course see them when they play the rangers and I see them when they play the devils or isles, nhl network games or nbc sports. How many games is that I don?t know but not three. I also watch nhl network every single day pretty much on a loop I also listen to nhl channel on Sirius when I?m in the car. I?m very aware of what is going on league wide I just don?t happen to care about what other teams do at the deadline I only care what the rangers do.

 

I am certain that the rangers are not a contender. That is my opinion not yours. I?m not degrading you or questioning your knowledge. But you are mine because of a perceived notion that you made a leap to conclude. If I called a specific person on this board a name it was in response to a post in which I was told to pull head out of my ass, my paragraph structure, or just basic response that I don?t have credibility to have a response.

 

I have zero interest in continuing the discussion going off the rails. I agree with you. I will say you wrote a long response to me reiterating that same point about Columbus. There are more than one post by me since your last response one in which was solely on Columbus and that I?m not clueless about what they are. I?m sure you just missed it but it?s there.

 

Still my point is the same I don?t care what they do. In my eyes the rangers are not contenders. So it makes Columbus decision to add or sell moot to me. The rangers should make moves that is in their best interest. To me that is to sell and not let ufa assets walk for nothing. I respect if you have a different view of the team. I think your woefully wrong and that you shouldn?t need 10 or 15 more games to prove that to you but I respect that can still be your view.

 

Hopefully you?re right. Hopefully they win the cup. However if they fall short, way short like the past couple of years, I?m going to be extremely pissed off that this management group just doesn?t learn.

 

To be honest we all know how this team is run. A lot of it is due to the perception that the fan base can?t handle a proper restructuring of the team. That?s why such ludicrous statements like rebuilding on the fly is uttered and executed. I never really bought into that perception but maybe it?s true. Just my opinion.

 

The worst part of all of it is that the futility this franchise experiences is due to reason that they don?t build their teams properly. They don?t value draft picks. Their coach can?t allow a young player to develop. It?s always the swing for the fence usually with a player past his prime. Even the times they try and do the right thing like not resigning cally they fuck up the other half. They somehow trade 2 1st round picks along with cally for a 40 year old. It?s infuriating.

 

It?s also frustrating to hear fans asking for more of the same.

[Dunny]

Incidentally, if they had had a real draft in 1966, there was a guy from Prairie Sound, Ontario and the Oshawa Generals who turned 18 that year. Blonde hair. He later wore No. 27 for the Bruins but quickly switched to, I believe, No. 4. I understand he turned out to be a pretty fair mobile defenseman. The Rangers finished last in 65-66 and would have gotten him. The world would have been a different place! North Korea would be peaceable.

 

Prairie Sound! LOL

 

I played in Bobby Orr Arena in Midget, we put out Parry Sound in 4 games in All-Ontarios. Best two weeks of my life.

[Giacomin]

Prairie Sound! LOL

 

I played in Bobby Orr Arena in Midget, we put out Parry Sound in 4 games in All-Ontarios. Best two weeks of my life.

 

You were a midget once?!

[Dunny]

I barely eclipse it now

[Sod16]

I always think of Orr and Secretariat together, because at Belmont Park, they used to (probably still do) have two souvenir/concession stores, the general Belmont Park store and the Secretariat store, while at the old Boston Garden, they also had two souvenir stores, the Bruins/Celtics store and the Orr store.

 

I to think he was the most hated enemy as a Ranger fan growing up.

[Future]

Who said I watched 3-4 games? Somebody brought up Columbus on a ranger site. What does columbus’s Decisions have to do with the rangers and what ails them. To use the point that this rangers can’t make tradexdeadline deals because Columbus wouldn’t has no basis. I’ve seen plenty of Columbus I know what they are. Probably not a cup team in my opinion but in my opinion probably better suited than the rangers to make a trade to go for it if they feel like it. Again probably ill advised but who cares.

It's relevant b/c if you're going to point to a very specific stat - regulation wins - and say that it's a reason the Rangers should be sellers, then you have to do the same for other teams who have the same number of wins. Otherwise, it means you're taking stats and trying to manipulate them to make your point, rather than looking at them with any objectivity.

 

At the end of the day, you don't think the Rangers look like a Cup team, so they should be sellers. That's fine. But if you use any stat/metric/observation to support that, then you have to use it the same for every team. Otherwise, your argument has 0 credibility.

[LONG LONG LONG TIME FAN]

why bring up Leetch,he wasn't a number one overall

 

Uh, comparison. Simply put; to show how unimportant draft places are. Why did someone mention Park?

[Fatfrancesa]

It's relevant b/c if you're going to point to a very specific stat - regulation wins - and say that it's a reason the Rangers should be sellers, then you have to do the same for other teams who have the same number of wins. Otherwise, it means you're taking stats and trying to manipulate them to make your point, rather than looking at them with any objectivity.

 

At the end of the day, you don't think the Rangers look like a Cup team, so they should be sellers. That's fine. But if you use any stat/metric/observation to support that, then you have to use it the same for every team. Otherwise, your argument has 0 credibility.

 

Here we go again with the 0 credibility thing.

 

I didn’t argue what any other team should or shouldn’t do. I don’t care what they do. By any advanced metric the rangers aren’t contenders.

 

I didn’t bring up Columbus and again what they do has no bearing on what the rangers do. If they go for it does not mean the rangers should too. I never once made an argument for them to do or not do anything. Again I don’t care what they do.

 

I really hope the rangers are better run than just following a decision from their competitors. Going for it and making trades or not making trades has ramifications. If Columbus wants to throw away assets for a cup run they are not positioned to make, we’ll that would be good for the rangers. The rangers are seemingly always in the go for it mode. Yes it is my opinion they are not positioned to go for it again. Not only by metrics but also because of the ramifications of prior deals in recent years to do the same. They have left their organizational depth in tatters. They made a correction dealibg Stepan but it’s not enough in my view.

 

It’s really a simple question which I have already come to a decision on. Others need more time that’s ok.

 

Are the rangers a legitimate Stanley cup contender? Depending on your answer and opinion the decision regarding Nash and Grabner is a no brainer. That goes both ways. If yes than keep them. If no and no extension then you have to trade them.

 

I’m not sure why this is so controversial to some. It’s standard operating practice by every team. The teams that make the right decisions are better for it. The teams that can fairly self evaluate can better for it

 

The good thing here is that the rangers never will have to make a decision purely about money. Cap yes but teams like Ottawa may trade Karlsson because they are cheap.

 

The bad thing is that the market the rangers play in obviously doesn’t allow them to make smart hockey moves if the self assessment points to selling.

 

For some unknown reason this market seems to think that by going for it every year they will eventually catch lightning in a bottle and win. 1 time in 80 years you would think would be enough said. That 1 time they were far and away the best team all year and they smartly went for it.

[Future]

Here we go again with the 0 credibility thing.

 

I didn’t argue what any other team should or shouldn’t do. I don’t care what they do. By any advanced metric the rangers aren’t contenders.

I didn’t bring up Columbus and again what they do has no bearing on what the rangers do. If they go for it does not mean the rangers should too. I never once made an argument for them to do or not do anything. Again I don’t care what they do.

I know you didn't bring up Columbus. I did. If you care about the 14 win number, then you have to care what they do or do not do, otherwise, your point about 14 regulation wins has no credibility.

 

You can rant all you want, but your whole point is one sentence. All I'm saying is that you don't need 500 word posts to say, "I think they should stink so they should sell," and arbitrarily throwing numbers out there doesn't work if you don't give any context.

[Giacomin]

I don't think he is ranting. He is framing his case and providing color and his rationale.

 

In fairness, Fatty took some criticism that was unnecessarily harsh and a little personal, earlier in the thread. He reacted, but I appreciate him regaining his composure and attempting to explain his argument and get back onto the substance of the matter. Not everybody was getting his meaning as quickly as you.

 

Also, it is fine to state the lack of regulation wins or similar statements without having to compare that with every team. He was dismissing Columbus, not because he does know them, but based on that comparative not being too meaningful to him. He wanted to stay focussed on the Rangers and the UFA dilemma. Obviously, he does not think Columbus is a great benchmark and that is not unreasonable. They could just as easily miss the playoffs too. Maybe the benchmark this season is Tampa, the Caps, Nashvillle, the Jets, etc.

[Long live the King]

Here we go again with the 0 credibility thing.

 

I didn’t argue what any other team should or shouldn’t do. I don’t care what they do. By any advanced metric the rangers aren’t contenders.

 

I didn’t bring up Columbus and again what they do has no bearing on what the rangers do. If they go for it does not mean the rangers should too. I never once made an argument for them to do or not do anything. Again I don’t care what they do.

 

I really hope the rangers are better run than just following a decision from their competitors. Going for it and making trades or not making trades has ramifications. If Columbus wants to throw away assets for a cup run they are not positioned to make, we’ll that would be good for the rangers. The rangers are seemingly always in the go for it mode. Yes it is my opinion they are not positioned to go for it again. Not only by metrics but also because of the ramifications of prior deals in recent years to do the same. They have left their organizational depth in tatters. They made a correction dealibg Stepan but it’s not enough in my view.

 

It’s really a simple question which I have already come to a decision on. Others need more time that’s ok.

 

Are the rangers a legitimate Stanley cup contender? Depending on your answer and opinion the decision regarding Nash and Grabner is a no brainer. That goes both ways. If yes than keep them. If no and no extension then you have to trade them.

 

I’m not sure why this is so controversial to some. It’s standard operating practice by every team. The teams that make the right decisions are better for it. The teams that can fairly self evaluate can better for it

 

The good thing here is that the rangers never will have to make a decision purely about money. Cap yes but teams like Ottawa may trade Karlsson because they are cheap.

 

The bad thing is that the market the rangers play in obviously doesn’t allow them to make smart hockey moves if the self assessment points to selling.

 

For some unknown reason this market seems to think that by going for it every year they will eventually catch lightning in a bottle and win. 1 time in 80 years you would think would be enough said. That 1 time they were far and away the best team all year and they smartly went for it.

 

Its not about how Columbus manages their franchise. It's about saying the Rangers aren't a contender, when every team in the division is in pretty much the same boat as the them. Columbus was brought up because at the time the were in second place as in the division, and the Rangers were just as close to passing them as they were to dropping out of a playoff spot.

 

And the 1 cup in 80 years thing is tired. Why do we still care about he 40's, 50's, 60's, and 70's? It was Montreal, then Toronto, then everyone else. Detroit won a few, Philly snuck in back to back, Boston snuck in back to back. The Islanders and Oilers owned the 80's. Why are we still hung up on this? It was a totally different era. This 1 in 80 years tries to make is seem like every other team has 5 or more cups in that time which is not true. The leafs have won in 49 years. I'm sure they no longer care how much they won during the original 6.

[Fatfrancesa]

I don’t think they should stink. I’m not asking for them to tank. I just happen to think they aren’t very good. Because I don’t think they are very good they should sell.

[Future]

Also, it is fine to state the lack of regulation wins or similar statements without having to compare that with every team. He was dismissing Columbus, not because he does know them, but based on that comparative not being too meaningful to him. He wanted to stay focussed on the Rangers and the UFA dilemma. Obviously, he does not think Columbus is a great benchmark and that is not unreasonable. They could just as easily miss the playoffs too. Maybe the benchmark this season is Tampa, the Caps, Nashvillle, the Jets, etc.

No it's not. If 14 regulation wins is an indicator that NYR should be sellers, fine. But it also means that other teams who have the same number should also be sellers. Otherwise, it's just an arbitrary number with no relevance. That number only matters when compared to the rest of the league, especially playoff teams in your division. It doesn't matter whether CBJ is or isn't going to be in the playoffs, but a singular number has to have context to matter.

 

In this case, Francesca picked that number up thinking that it was a damning statistic not realizing that it put the Rangers on par with a team that was, at the time, second in the division.

[Fatfrancesa]

Its not about how Columbus manages their franchise. It's about saying the Rangers aren't a contender, when every team in the division is in pretty much the same boat as the them. Columbus was brought up because at the time the were in second place as in the division, and the Rangers were just as close to passing them as they were to dropping out of a playoff spot.

 

And the 1 cup in 80 years thing is tired. Why do we still care about he 40's, 50's, 60's, and 70's? It was Montreal, then Toronto, then everyone else. Detroit won a few, Philly snuck in back to back, Boston snuck in back to back. The Islanders and Oilers owned the 80's. Why are we still hung up on this? It was a totally different era. This 1 in 80 years tries to make is seem like every other team has 5 or more cups in that time which is not true. The leafs have won in 49 years. I'm sure they no longer care how much they won during the original 6.

 

Ok sorry. I didn’t get the memo what is relevant or not. Is the past two years ok? Three? How about the past 23?

 

The past two years alone anybody with an honest assessment of this team knew they had major problems. Two years ago they got absolutely smoked and it wasn’t surprising. They probably thought they had a decent chance to turn it on based on the prior years but oh were they wrong. Traded for Staal and even worse let Yandle walk away for nothing when he would have yielded a lot. A lot of what could be playing now.

 

Last year again major problems for all to see. They again traded picks for smith. Smith who played well, above what he had done during his career. However even with very favorable matchups they lost. They didn’t even lose to a very good team. They lost because of what we’ve seen all this year. They are a terrible defensive team.

 

Now I know you aren’t looking at 2019 or 2020. But I do know you weren’t looking at 2018 either two years ago.

 

So 80 years doesn’t matter. Well I’m 40 and since I’ve been watching my entire life that I can remember I can count on one hand maybe one finger the times they actually sold at the deadline.

 

And you’re right before the cap this wouldn’t be as big of a deal. But since the cap era begun it has gotten obviously more important to have youth and cheap talent. So thanks for pointing that out.

[Fatfrancesa]

No it's not. If 14 regulation wins is an indicator that NYR should be sellers, fine. But it also means that other teams who have the same number should also be sellers. Otherwise, it's just an arbitrary number with no relevance. That number only matters when compared to the rest of the league, especially playoff teams in your division. It doesn't matter whether CBJ is or isn't going to be in the playoffs, but a singular number has to have context to matter.

 

In this case, Francesca picked that number up thinking that it was a damning statistic not realizing that it put the Rangers on par with a team that was, at the time, second in the division.

 

You got me. 14 regulation wins in 44 games screams contender. My credibility surely is shot with a comment like that. Good point. Playoff games are always decided by 3 on 3 play and circus acts.

 

Did allowing 37 shots per game over the past 20 games not make your metrics. Does Corsi since December not matter? Why are you cherry picking my statements?

[The Dude]

Listen Fatso. Can you please stop with the victim stuff? You came in this telling people they are "wrong and should probably stop posting", you also went on to say that my opinion on options to upgrade the team were like "searching for Bigfoot and unicorns" or some other insult.. Please just stop the crying.

 

The point about Columbus was that they are the competition RIGHT NOW, and are considered a top team in the east AS IS. The Rangers AS is, stack up well with them. The competition isn't world's apart. Columbus is a favorite to come out of the east. I'd say it's them Pitt Wash and Tampa as the favorites. That's not some impossible feat to beat these teams. And this is with a Ranger team that has yet to click on all cylinders as of yet, and could maybe improve with a trade or two..

 

I think you're opinion holds weight in a gut feeling kind of way, but to not see that this team is in comparison with the conference best, is being hard headed and argumentative in an effort to push the agenda you would like to see.

[Long live the King]

You got me. 14 regulation wins in 44 games screams contender. My credibility surely is shot with a comment like that. Good point. Playoff games are always decided by 3 on 3 play and circus acts.

 

Did allowing 37 shots per game over the past 20 games not make your metrics. Does Corsi since December not matter? Why are you cherry picking my statements?

 

Dude, all he's saying is provide some context. You bring up the Rangers only 14, now 15 regulation wins. Awesome. Where does that rank among the league or teams you consider contenders? You get super defensive, when all he wants you to do is expand on how this stat you bring up compares to other teams and proves or disproves your argument.

[Fatfrancesa]

Listen Fatso. Can you please stop with the victim stuff? You came in this telling people they are "wrong and should probably stop posting", you also went on to say that my opinion on options to upgrade the team were like "searching for Bigfoot and unicorns" or some other insult.. Please just stop the crying.

 

The point about Columbus was that they are the competition RIGHT NOW, and are considered a top team in the east AS IS. The Rangers AS is, stack up well with them. The competition isn't world's apart. Columbus is a favorite to come out of the east. I'd say it's them Pitt Wash and Tampa as the favorites. That's not some impossible feat to beat these teams. And this is with a Ranger team that has yet to click on all cylinders as of yet, and could maybe improve with a trade or two..

 

I think you're opinion holds weight in a gut feeling kind of way, but to not see that this team is in comparison with the conference best, is being hard headed and argumentative in an effort to push the agenda you would like to see.

 

Look at how you start your post, why? You want good discussion then stop. I’ve stopped days ago with the crap and you continue.

[Fatfrancesa]

For what it’s worth I don’t know who made a team who has never in history won a playoff series a favorite. If you’re saying the hockey insiders did well those same insiders are saying right now that the rangers are not real contenders

[Fatfrancesa]

Still curious why Columbus, who has never in their history won a playoff series, became a measuring stick for a contender.

 

Also that history is important for that team. Winning a round or two would be a good thing for that franchise and probably measured a success.

[josh]

Still curious why Columbus, who has never in their history won a playoff series, became a measuring stick for a contender.

 

Also that history is important for that team. Winning a round or two would be a good thing for that franchise and probably measured a success.

 

Theyve been a top team in the east. Great goaltender, solid system, hard working team, fast, can score, can defend. Tough team to face in a 7-game series. Favorite? no, contender, yes.

[Long live the King]

Still curious why Columbus, who has never in their history won a playoff series, became a measuring stick for a contender.

 

Also that history is important for that team. Winning a round or two would be a good thing for that franchise and probably measured a success.

 

They won 50 games last year and got knocked out by the eventual cup winner, and again when the comparison started they sat 2nd in the division.

 

Instead of harping on why Columbus was brought up, why don't you tell us who your contenders are?