• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Guest The Axe

New York Rangers

Rate this topic

22 posts in this topic

Its almost 20 more years of cup drought for these guys. I dont think there's a more underachieving team in hockey. Maple Leafs come in a close 2nd for me, but I think the Rangers take the cake for a team that underutilizes its resourses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Rangers have had way more talent in recent years. There's really no excuse for their underachieving. When people said the Wings bought their teams I pointed to the Rags, who spent about as much money. It still takes talent to buy a winning team and assemble it.

But Toronto has had talent, too. And being the center of the hockey universe, they are very disappointing, too. Toronto is the bigger embarassment, but the Rangers are the bigger disappointment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Rangers have had way more talent in recent years. There's really no excuse for their underachieving. When people said the Wings bought their teams I pointed to the Rags, who spent about as much money. It still takes talent to buy a winning team and assemble it.

But Toronto has had talent, too. And being the center of the hockey universe, they are very disappointing, too. Toronto is the bigger embarassment, but the Rangers are the bigger disappointment.

The Rangers have talent, yes, and they're just about due to spend a boatload more money on it. Sather has been terrible for that organization.

haroldsnepsts likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Maple Leafs and the Canucks and probably Sharks all come to mind before NYR in terms of expectations and actual achievement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The teams they had 10 years ago were a lot more underachieving.

This team is not as talented as teams like the Hawks, Penguins and Bruins. Not surprised they haven't won anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unlike those other teams the Rangers have had a fairly consistent talent level. From 2000 or so until now. Probably earlier, too. I think we are all talking in a general sense of this era of the Rangers, not just the current team or the last three or four years. At least I am.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Maple Leafs and the Canucks and probably Sharks all come to mind before NYR in terms of expectations and actual achievement.

I was also going to say the Sharks. They've had the talent and chances, just missing one element. I personally believe the missing element is "non-douchebaggery"....

Z Winged Dangler and 55fan like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Rags have been trapped in a hockey purgatory for the past decade or so. They consistently do well enough to not warrant a rebuild, and have low picks in the draft, but not quite enough talent/heart/whatever to get to the top.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Rangers have been under a terrible GM and under a very bad coach during the last few years, thanks to the CBA they are another team held down by the league. I really thought they didn't give up a lot for Nash but Sather never replaced the depth of this team combine that with Freakarellas style of coaching and the results aren't going to be pretty. Seriously stars like Nash, Richards and Gaborik as shot blockers? That's ridiculous

Like someone mentioned Vigneault could really turn this team around, Lundqvist deserves a stanley cup before retiring.

Edited by frankgrimes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Rangers have been under a terrible GM and under a very bad coach during the last few years, thanks to the CBA they are another team held down by the league. I really thought they didn't give up a lot for Nash but Sather never replaced the depth of this team combine that with Freakarellas style of coaching and the results aren't going to be pretty. Seriously stars like Nash, Richards and Gaborik as shot blockers? That's ridiculous Like someone mentioned Vigneault could really turn this team around, Lundqvist deserves a stanley cup before retiring.

Agreed completely, i'm expecting a different team under a new coach. A sharp tongue in New York kept Torts there longer than he should have been and he doesn't fit anywhere as an NHL coach. Expect a big rebound for Brad Richards this season, and that team should be a stronger contender in coming seasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyways, Alain Vigneault might be able to turn this around for them. Sometimes all you need is a change.

This. I had hopes for John Tortorella since he won a Cup with Tampa Bay and such, but with the team that team had, his coaching style didn't work. Hopefully it does in Vancouver (as much as it pains me to say it), I wish him the best there since he's an American coach. I really like the style AV coaches and I think he'll help out this team and we'll finally see their potential. I mean hell, look at the season a couple years ago when they dominated under JT. Yeah sure it was a different roster, but I believe they upgraded their talent and are a better team now. The NYR are my second favorite team other than the Wings, I want them to win SO bad. And honestly, their Cup drought isn't that bad if you think about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The teams they had 10 years ago were a lot more underachieving.

Agreed. Those teams back then had guys like Bure, Lindros, Kovalev, and Leetch, and from what I remember, they didn't make the playoffs in the few years before the lockout.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vigenault has his work cut out for him this comming season for sure. Seeing as Rangers, at this moment, only have 6 players contracted thru the 2014/2015 season he need to get som big names to buy into the new system and resign, the biggest name beeing Lundqvist. As far as I have seen in interviews Lundqvist have been non-committant about signing a new long contract.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vigenault has his work cut out for him this comming season for sure. Seeing as Rangers, at this moment, only have 6 players contracted thru the 2014/2015 season he need to get som big names to buy into the new system and resign, the biggest name beeing Lundqvist. As far as I have seen in interviews Lundqvist have been non-committant about signing a new long contract.

Sather does what a lot of Wings fans want Holland to do. Big name free agent? Pay him! Good player available in trade? Get him matter the cost!

Nev likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sather does what a lot of Wings fans want Holland to do. Big name free agent? Pay him! Good player available in trade? Get him matter the cost!

The Rangers would have won a cup with babcock behind the bench!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sather does what a lot of Wings fans want Holland to do. Big name free agent? Pay him! Good player available in trade? Get him matter the cost!

Yep, he and Holmgren both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bench one of the best playmakers of this generation in the playoffs, allow Rick Nash to float like a derp and say one of your hardest workers on your team stinks on the PP... Good thing Tortorella is gone, but honestly, Vineaught or however you spell his name is just a different evil. Instead of publically embarrasing his players, he trashes other teams and makes excuses for everything and has zero grasp on reality which is why he was so wonderful in Vancouver. I wouldn't have hired either of those dummies. Ruff would have been a much better coach for the Rags especially coaching against them in Buffalo for so long. Lundqvist will win a cup once he's traded to a contender in 6 years or so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rangers, Philly and Toronto. 3 biggest markets in the NHL, bags of cash, fervent fans, hysterical media, desperate win-now-at-all-costs owners.

It can't be a coincidence that those 3 teams have between them won 1 Stanley Cup in the last 38 years, can it?

Share this post


Link to post
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
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0