Home Page
 OTG

Search | Statistics | User Listing Forums | Albums | Skins | Language
You are logged in as a guest. ( logon | register )

James Dolan “We Won’t Tank”
Moderators: Moderators

Jump to page : 1
Now viewing page 1 [35 messages per page]
View previous thread :: View next thread
   Rangers -> Winter Is ComingMessage format
 
Steady Eddie
Posted 2019-01-08 4:42 AM (#717711)
Subject: James Dolan “We Won’t Tank”



MVP

Posts: 7628
5000
In Newsday and the Post:
I think they're giving away that emotional development for the team," said Dolan. "So, none of my teams are going to tank. I'll never tell a team to lose.


https://www.newsday.com/sports/hockey/rangers/rangers-knicks-james-d...

https://nypost.com/2019/01/07/james-dolan-weighs-in-on-the-rangers-c...

Thoughts?
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Mikey Red
Posted 2019-01-08 6:50 AM (#717712 - in reply to #717711)
Subject: Re: James Dolan “We Won’t Tank”


Legend

Posts: 20381
10000
Location: AV is gone
I reckon he has to say that
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Rranger
Posted 2019-01-08 7:21 AM (#717714 - in reply to #717711)
Subject: Re: James Dolan “We Won’t Tank”


MVP

Posts: 6362
5000
What else can he say. To a point I believe the intent is to win every game, especially on Quinn's end.. Its a double edged sword, if they use all their resources they might battle for a wildcard spot and a hasty exit from the playoffs. If they fold they can gain resources to attempt the rebuild. The key is folding without losing your mojo, pretty much what he said. Its Garry's new NHL where the trickery makes bad teams look competitive. The Rangers are now well enveloped in mediocrity, and the clock is ticking on Gorton's moves. I've said it before if he doesn't slam this years trade deadline dump and following draft, the Rangers will be out of bullets and in for some extended life as a middle of the pack dog.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
concust
Posted 2019-01-08 8:24 AM (#717715 - in reply to #717711)
Subject: Re: James Dolan “We Won’t Tank”



Legend

Posts: 15741
10000
Location: USA
I think he would open himself up to some sort of discipline or punishment from the league if he outright says "we're gonna tank." That's bad for his bottom line in the short term, but also a bad look for the league. The league won't mind if his pocketbook is a little lighter for a couple years, considering they're one of the most valuable franchises in the league, but they won't tolerate him making a mockery of the league or the draft lottery system.

I've said it before if he doesn't slam this years trade deadline dump and following draft, the Rangers will be out of bullets and in for some extended life as a middle of the pack dog.


This year's trade deadline is not looking great, due to the number of assets reportedly available. Right now it's a buyer's market, and that's expected to continue through the deadline. The benefit for the Rangers though is they have so many different types of assets available, everything from young forwards with some time left on an affordable contract (Kreider, Vesey), to young forwards going UFA (Hayes), veteran forwards going UFA (Zucc), young scoring defensemen, veteran defensemen, etc.

I would not expect to be wowed by any trades at the deadline if i'm being honest, which is why I'm hoping for a low finish and some luck with the lottery balls.

Top of the page Bottom of the page
Blue404
Posted 2019-01-08 4:15 PM (#717721 - in reply to #717711)
Subject: Re: James Dolan “We Won’t Tank”


Legend

Posts: 17753
10000
Location: USA
It’s an old song of his.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
robstones
Posted 2019-01-08 6:29 PM (#717725 - in reply to #717711)
Subject: RE: James Dolan “We Won’t Tank”



Legend

Posts: 13124
10000
Location: New Jersey


He's saying, "don't tank" like this....
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Rranger
Posted 2019-01-08 8:09 PM (#717750 - in reply to #717715)
Subject: Re: James Dolan “We Won’t Tank”


MVP

Posts: 6362
5000
concust - 2019-01-08 7:24 AM

I think he would open himself up to some sort of discipline or punishment from the league if he outright says "we're gonna tank." That's bad for his bottom line in the short term, but also a bad look for the league. The league won't mind if his pocketbook is a little lighter for a couple years, considering they're one of the most valuable franchises in the league, but they won't tolerate him making a mockery of the league or the draft lottery system.

I've said it before if he doesn't slam this years trade deadline dump and following draft, the Rangers will be out of bullets and in for some extended life as a middle of the pack dog.


This year's trade deadline is not looking great, due to the number of assets reportedly available. Right now it's a buyer's market, and that's expected to continue through the deadline. The benefit for the Rangers though is they have so many different types of assets available, everything from young forwards with some time left on an affordable contract (Kreider, Vesey), to young forwards going UFA (Hayes), veteran forwards going UFA (Zucc), young scoring defensemen, veteran defensemen, etc.

I would not expect to be wowed by any trades at the deadline if i'm being honest, which is why I'm hoping for a low finish and some luck with the lottery balls.







ZUccarello and Hayes will be two of the biggest names out there and will likely be moved by the deadline. When and if Gorton trades them it better be for returns that benefit the Rangers long term. The fact they are in the best player available group speaks to the mediocrity in today’s NHL. The Rangers can not afford trade or draft flubs. The ball is 100% in Gorton and Clark’s court.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
concust
Posted 2019-01-09 8:52 AM (#717834 - in reply to #717711)
Subject: Re: James Dolan “We Won’t Tank”



Legend

Posts: 15741
10000
Location: USA

There are a lot of players who will be available this deadline. IMO the Rangers are better off trading off assets they KNOW will end up getting moved at the beginning of the trade season, rather than in the thick of it. (Hayes, Zucc, McQuaid). I am sure that at this point, with that November win streak farther and farther in the distance, they are selling and will want long term pieces, whether it's picks or young players. I'm worried that when the deadline approaches, the market is going to be flooded and the value for our assets will go down.

If we don't score a top-5 pick, this draft seems like the kind where it would be better to have more picks rather than higher picks.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Rranger
Posted 2019-01-10 6:32 AM (#717841 - in reply to #717711)
Subject: Re: James Dolan “We Won’t Tank”


MVP

Posts: 6362
5000
The Rangers need to accrue every asset they can. Problem is they will acquire the chips in this draft, unless they try to acquire picks for next year. I didn’t see much out of Hughes and the Finn to get giddy about as future Rangers. Ranger luck no Mathews or even a McKinnon is available. I see Hughe’s skill but no one is going to be afraid of him.

When the chips are traded is a moot point as long as they get good value, and I don't disagree sooner is likely better than later.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
concust
Posted 2019-01-10 8:03 AM (#717843 - in reply to #717711)
Subject: Re: James Dolan “We Won’t Tank”



Legend

Posts: 15741
10000
Location: USA
I have also not seen much of Hughes or Kakko beyond the WJC; Hughes was injured/playing through injury for a couple of games, Kakko however really helped drive the Finns to the gold. Neither one is supposed to be a generational player, but each could be elite level.

No, comparatively, neither is projected to be a Matthews or a Mackinnon. But make no mistake the Rangers would be thrilled to have either one.

It's not any better for 2020 either, Lafreniere is really the only one at this point in that class of player. So even if NYR manage to get a top pick for 2020 it's not like there's a McDavid level prospect waiting for them.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Rranger
Posted 2019-01-10 8:46 AM (#717844 - in reply to #717711)
Subject: Re: James Dolan “We Won’t Tank”


MVP

Posts: 6362
5000
Well they may be thrilled but they would be a lot more thrilled if it was a generational talent or at least a franchise guy. I watched most of the games and always pay attention to 'the next ones" and kakko played well and contributed but i disagree he helped drive the Fnns being one member of a pretty solid group. Hughes skill is obvious but can a Mitch Marner type carry a team? Hughes oozes skill, but he will need a Wayne Simmonds or two on his wings.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
concust
Posted 2019-01-10 1:03 PM (#717846 - in reply to #717844)
Subject: Re: James Dolan “We Won’t Tank”



Legend

Posts: 15741
10000
Location: USA
Rranger - 2019-01-10 9:46 AM

Well they may be thrilled but they would be a lot more thrilled if it was a generational talent or at least a franchise guy. I watched most of the games and always pay attention to 'the next ones" and kakko played well and contributed but i disagree he helped drive the Fnns being one member of a pretty solid group. Hughes skill is obvious but can a Mitch Marner type carry a team? Hughes oozes skill, but he will need a Wayne Simmonds or two on his wings.


I think either could easily be a franchise guy. They're simply not generational talents, they just don't come around that often. I'm happy to take the most talented kid we can afford.

FWIW Marner can absolutely carry a team, the only reason he's a "second fiddle" kind of guy right now is due to the team he's on. He's been a leader his entire career.

Lastly I don't know why a Hughes would need a Wayne Simmonds or two on his wings. Because he's small, and can't produce in The Bigs unless he has bodyguards? Gaudreau is smaller than Hughes and he plays with Monahan (8 PIM) and Lindholm (14 PIM)
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Rranger
Posted 2019-01-10 10:32 PM (#718019 - in reply to #717846)
Subject: Re: James Dolan “We Won’t Tank”


MVP

Posts: 6362
5000
concust - 2019-01-10 12:03 PM

Rranger - 2019-01-10 9:46 AM

Well they may be thrilled but they would be a lot more thrilled if it was a generational talent or at least a franchise guy. I watched most of the games and always pay attention to 'the next ones" and kakko played well and contributed but i disagree he helped drive the Fnns being one member of a pretty solid group. Hughes skill is obvious but can a Mitch Marner type carry a team? Hughes oozes skill, but he will need a Wayne Simmonds or two on his wings.


I think either could easily be a franchise guy. They're simply not generational talents, they just don't come around that often. I'm happy to take the most talented kid we can afford.

FWIW Marner can absolutely carry a team, the only reason he's a "second fiddle" kind of guy right now is due to the team he's on. He's been a leader his entire career.

Lastly I don't know why a Hughes would need a Wayne Simmonds or two on his wings. Because he's small, and can't produce in The Bigs unless he has bodyguards? Gaudreau is smaller than Hughes and he plays with Monahan (8 PIM) and Lindholm (14 PIM)



I’ll believe even franchise players when I see it. Marner is playing with some of the best forwards in the league, could he carry a team centering Kris Kreider and Josh Bailey, probably but to what height? Mid pack probably and not what I’d want from a franchise forward. Reality is most teams have a Hughes or Kakko, and need a lot more than that to compete. Gaudreau no doubt is a talent and gets banged around a lot, probably because he plays with Lindholm and Monahan. If it continues it will become a issue. You still have to look after your own.

Edited by Rranger 2019-01-10 10:34 PM
Top of the page Bottom of the page
concust
Posted 2019-01-11 8:51 AM (#718027 - in reply to #717711)
Subject: Re: James Dolan “We Won’t Tank”



Legend

Posts: 15741
10000
Location: USA
I guess we would need to define franchise guy? Not sure if you're using the same definition I am. To me that's basically, one of the top 31 players in the league. (Rough definition) Sure some teams have two, some teams have (ostensibly) none. A guy you could build a franchise around. And of course you'll believe it when you see it; in a draft you're forward projecting and I'm saying both these guys have that potential. (Almost) every #1 or #2 pick has this potential, though not every one of them fulfills it. I can't remember the last draft that featured a #1 pick that would not have been projected to be a franchise player.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Rranger
Posted 2019-01-12 7:11 AM (#718037 - in reply to #717711)
Subject: Re: James Dolan “We Won’t Tank”


MVP

Posts: 6362
5000
I see what your saying and many would agree with you. My opinion is the generational talent label used to be applied to franchise players of which there were few. And still only a few. If you take McDavid and other franchise cornerstone players out of the mix it still leaves a lot of very good players, but not guys you can build a team around, unless they have more help. Crosby and Malkin are the classic example of franchise players making every one around them better, and they have to because Pittsburgh's had some pretty ordinary players contributing to their cups.
Tampa is a good example, arguably the best team in hockey. Franchise players? Hedman yes, Point? don't think so. Stamkos close but nope. Kucherov I guess in todays NHL. But shouldn't a franchise player do it all on both sides of the puck? Does Kucherov?
I think this whole generational player, franchise player rebranding that became the norm after McDavid arrived is crap. In today's NHL you have the best (generational) and now the second best (franchise) and the rest. That's just a nice way of calling Jamie Benn, Tyler Sequin, and many others franchise players, and convincing NHL patrons that these so called franchise players, so many of whom have pretty good chinks in their game, are worth the ticket price. Pretty masterful job of marketing a Volkswagon as a Mercedes.



Edited by Rranger 2019-01-12 1:47 PM
Top of the page Bottom of the page
concust
Posted 2019-01-14 9:10 AM (#718178 - in reply to #718037)
Subject: Re: James Dolan “We Won’t Tank”



Legend

Posts: 15741
10000
Location: USA
Rranger - 2019-01-12 8:11 AM

I see what your saying and many would agree with you. My opinion is the generational talent label used to be applied to franchise players of which there were few. And still only a few. If you take McDavid and other franchise cornerstone players out of the mix it still leaves a lot of very good players, but not guys you can build a team around, unless they have more help. Crosby and Malkin are the classic example of franchise players making every one around them better, and they have to because Pittsburgh's had some pretty ordinary players contributing to their cups.
Tampa is a good example, arguably the best team in hockey. Franchise players? Hedman yes, Point? don't think so. Stamkos close but nope. Kucherov I guess in todays NHL. But shouldn't a franchise player do it all on both sides of the puck? Does Kucherov?
I think this whole generational player, franchise player rebranding that became the norm after McDavid arrived is crap. In today's NHL you have the best (generational) and now the second best (franchise) and the rest. That's just a nice way of calling Jamie Benn, Tyler Sequin, and many others franchise players, and convincing NHL patrons that these so called franchise players, so many of whom have pretty good chinks in their game, are worth the ticket price. Pretty masterful job of marketing a Volkswagon as a Mercedes.



Yeah I think our definitions are a bit off which is why there's some disagreement. I think even the term "generational" is a little silly because that implies basically a 20-30 year talent which is not a good point of reference for the discussion.

To me a generational talent is the type of talent that comes along every 10 years or so. They define the LEAGUE while they play. Franchise players, are more like players that define your team for the time they are there. So using your TB example, I'd argue that their franchise players have been LeCavalier, St Louis, Stamkos, Hedman. Kucherov to me is a bubble guy, and I'd give it to him after another year or two of putting up points. A guy like Brayden Point, like Kucherov, comes down to a longevity issue. I wouldn't call a guy a franchise player after a year or 3. If he can help define a franchise for 5 years, then sure he's in the conversation (like Hedman)

Back to our original discussion - I was stating that I certainly think that Hughes or Kakko could be reasonably expected to be franchise players, the type of player that define a team for 5-10 years. Not saying they are now, or that they even will be by year 3. But they certainly have the potential, and the expectation to do so, to justify the top picks.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Jump to page : 1
Now viewing page 1 [35 messages per page]
Jump to forum :
Search this forum
Printer friendly version
E-mail a link to this thread

(Delete all cookies set by this site)
Running MegaBBS ASP Forum Software
© 2002-2019 PD9 Software