josh Posted June 28, 2018 Share Posted June 28, 2018 I see on CapGeek he is owed $6,000,000 until 2021 and that contract is buyout-proof Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giacomin Posted June 28, 2018 Share Posted June 28, 2018 The Post says... let's not confuse a reporter with a columnist I was all but told here that columnists, I guess due to that title, need not hold to any journalistic standards. They have carte blanche to publish anything, even when it contradicts prior columns or even prior sentences. Their content is not subject to the criticism other writers [with credentialed access, contacts and 30 years in the business] may receive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 The Post says... let's not confuse a reporter with a columnist I was all but told here that columnists, I guess due to that title, need not hold to any journalistic standards. They have carte blanche to publish anything, even when it contradicts prior columns or even prior sentences. Their content is not subject to the criticism other writers [with credentialed access, contacts and 30 years in the business] may receive.Which has nothing to do with nothing in this context. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giacomin Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 In this context it has to do with appropriate criticism from you and others, for Brooks contradicting his own thesis. Its crappy newspaper writing and makes for a nonsensical narrative regarding the Ranger intentions. I was also noting the irony of another unprovoked, unnecessary and unsolicited personal attack on me, by you, in another recent thread. When I criticized Brooks for "reporting" definitively on two newsworthy items, yet not citing whether he was speculating or getting the info from somewhere, you said to Future about me... "Many times I've tried to explain an opinion piece versus a report. It never took." Basically, I'm too thick to comprehend the difference between the types of pieces newspapermen write, completely missing my criticism. Essentially, the same writer penned a shoddy piece because the reader is given "news" (stated definitively that Rangers not interested in Hamilton) yet never supported it, attributed it, or hinted it was his opinion. The correlation being the reader is left with more questions about the Ranger's intentions, then before they started reading. Similar to this recent column. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 In this context it has to do with appropriate criticism from you and others, for Brooks contradicting his own thesis. Its crappy newspaper writing and makes for a nonsensical narrative regarding the Ranger intentions. I was also noting the irony of another unprovoked, unnecessary and unsolicited personal attack on me, by you, in another recent thread. When I criticized Brooks for "reporting" definitively on two newsworthy items, yet not citing whether he was speculating or getting the info from somewhere, you said to Future about me... "Many times I've tried to explain an opinion piece versus a report. It never took." Basically, I'm too thick to comprehend the difference between the types of pieces newspapermen write, completely missing my criticism. Essentially, the same writer penned a shoddy piece because the reader is given "news" (stated definitively that Rangers not interested in Hamilton) yet never supported it, attributed it, or hinted it was his opinion. The correlation being the reader is left with more questions about the Ranger's intentions, then before they started reading. Similar to this recent column. Gotta use some common sense here. If Larry is saying the Rangers have no interest in ______, I’d be forced to believe that’s not his opinion. If you can’t look beyond your hate for him to figure that out, that’s on you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunny Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 Lucic, Komorov, Reaves. This is going better than planned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giacomin Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 Lucic, Komorov, Reaves. This is going better than planned. Yeah, years of revenge will be met-out. It will definitely get out our frustrations. I'm just concerned about who is going to center that line. Bah, Leo's got this. He won't need to worry about D responsibilities since the oppo will be running for their lives. And Zuc will be the most badass 5'7 version of himself again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giacomin Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 Gotta use some common sense here. If Larry is saying the Rangers have no interest in ______, I’d be forced to believe that’s not his opinion. If you can’t look beyond your hate for him to figure that out, that’s on you. Mike I try, I really try. I give him a clean slate each read. Sometimes, I'll read his column two or three times to look for qualifiers or to decipher what he's saying and if he is hinting at any deeper knowledge or if he is just throwing stuff at the wall cause he has a deadline. Readers should not have to do that. I don't hate him, its his columns. I'm consistent, my principles don't change and he is consistent. He rarely holds himself to any journalistic standards anymore and doesn't seem like he writes to inform and enlighten his target reader... inquiring Ranger fans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giacomin Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 Mike, when you try, one of your posts will often contain more real Ranger info than 10 consecutive columns by Brooks. BTW, that column in question also definitively stated that Calgary was NOT moving Fox, contradicting Calgary sources. He did not even hint where that came from or if it was just his own conclusion, but look how that turned out, only days later. Late edit: my critiques of certain columns are not of the general or hateful variety. Almost always, my post questions a piece of the content in the column. My criticism is specific and supported, not general and hateful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slobberknocker Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 im reading this and thinking wouldn't it be funny if the rangers assembled a one year goon squad and just terrorized the rest of the nhl.... ahem, while were "rebuilding" that is.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 Lucic, Komorov, Reaves. This is going better than planned. I seriously doubt they are entertaining more than one. But I do like the idea of bringing in quality physical players while the team continues to inject teenagers into the lineup. Again, it's not a deterrent, but I think it's pretty clear a 19-year-old who just got trucked would be thankful to watch Reaves fuck that guy up. Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThirtyONE Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 Agreed. The days of standing around while a teammate gets dummied is over. Smith in the lineup would be helpful as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
torontonyr Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 A focused and in-shape Smith would be a huge boost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giacomin Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 im reading this and thinking wouldn't it be funny if the rangers assembled a one year goon squad and just terrorized the rest of the nhl.... ahem, while were "rebuilding" that is.... Ha ha, terrorize the league. Where's Freddy Shero at? We should have a list of scores to settle. By the time our kids are ready, the league will be begging us to go back to a speed and skill game. And we'll oblige. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozzy Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 I would absolutely LOVE it if this happened!! Wanna sell some tickets?? Here's a great way!!! Young upcoming talent and a collection of guys who will drop the gloves and batter teams. Can't be a bunch of pussies forever....and trust me, these last few years...we've been gigantic pussies out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 For the record, this is a temporary situation. I'm all for adding these guys while the Chyils and Kravtsovs, etc are developing. Once the Rangers are ready to contend, the shift should be swift to icing the most effective possible lineup. That means less plugs, more talent. Even on the fourth line. Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozzy Posted June 29, 2018 Share Posted June 29, 2018 Agreed Phil! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.