Consensus is the Rangers general manager Glen Sather made the smart and responsible move in not giving into the inexplicably high demands by the Columbus Blue Jackets for perennial 30 goal 65 point man Rick Nash. There is no doubt about the talents of Nash and what they could have done for this year's Ranger team. The guy can flat out score. He has a high quality shot, premier size and by escaping the purgatory that is Columbus Blue Jacket hockey, he would likely play his heart out down the stretch.
Nevertheless, there are three main reasons why Sather's decision not to make the trade for Nash was the smart one.
1) The Price - Ultimately, this is, in fact, what stopped the trade from being made. While a very good player, Nash neither has the stats nor the proven leadership abilities to garner a package that included Ryan McDonough or Michael Del Zotto, Derek Stepan or Carl Hagelin, Brandon Dubinsky, top prospect Chris Kreider and a 1st round pick, which according to New York Post writer Larry Brooks was the asking price for Nash. While that trade would have been absurd to anyone who has watched this year's Rangers team and what they seem capable of, looking at Sather's history and his penchant for trying to acquire the Big Fish, I have no doubt Sather considered the high demand by Columbus.
2) Nash's Cap Hit - This is not your father's NHL. With the hard salary cap in place and the upcoming CBA negotiations, there is so much more that comes into play during trade discussions than the abilities of the players involved. In reality, you are only as good as you are, relative to your cap hit. This is especially true with a team like the Rangers that has no issue handing out big contracts and therefore generally gets less bang for their buck. At 7.8 million for many more years, Nash has the fourth highest cap hit in the NHL. Nash has never scored 80 points and has a career plus/minus of -75. His cap hit is higher than Malkin, the Sedins, Toews, Stamkos, Perry, Backstrom, Datsyuk, Giroux and everyone else in the league not named Crosby, Ovechkin or Eric Staal. For a cap hit of that magnitude for a player with Nash's production, Columbus has no business demanding from the Rangers what they did. Nash's cap hit makes him less valuable than he already is. This is something GMs fail to see; you aren't just trading Rick Nash, you are trading for his bloated contract as well.
3) The "He Is the Best Player on a Bad Team in a Small Market so He Must Be Underrated So Much So That He Becomes Overrated" Syndrome - This idea takes hold in many sports. A guy plays for a bad team for years and puts up great numbers. He isn't really publicized much in the national media and his team's games are rarely nationally televised. He is a former 1st overall pick. He is flashy. He scores highlight real goals. He is a hulking winger. He has no talent around him which accounts for his low assist totals. And so on. All of these play into the media making Nash out to be a star in the NHL when his true stats do not back up that idea. He has been viewed as a figure stuck in a bad situatioon in Columbus all the while his "stock" has risen while his talents have not.
Don't get me wrong, I would love Nash on the Rangers. But for that price and for that cap hit, I''ll pass.
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
Should the Rangers Make a Big Splash at the Deadline or Not?
There comes a time when every general manager ("GM"), no matter what sport, has to decide whether to be a buyer or seller at the trade deadline. That question usually answers itself depending on where a team sits in the standings. Once that answer is clear, as it is with this year's Ranger team, (with the most points in the East, they are obviously buyers) a GM, Glen Sather in the Rangers' case, must decide whether to truly shake things up and go for the Cup or to stand pat and be comfortable enough with his current roster to tweak a bit and nothing more.
What Sather decides to do before the trade deadline will likely determine whether the Rangers make a deep run in the playoffs or whether they fall meekly in the first or second round. This Rangers team is clearly a close bunch with one specific purpose and one ideal. Play for each other and play hard. Any move to acquire a big-time scorer will likely cost the team at least one primary player off the current roster and a high end prospect and/or draft pick. Sather should not do it. He should go out and tweak, maybe upgrade any position where injuries could play a factor, but nothing more.
This team is not the 94' Stanley Cup winning Rangers. That team had all-time greats, many players who though past their prime still did enough to contribute. The Rangers sacrificed perhaps 10 years of competitiveness for that grasp at the Cup and thankfully they won. In the process though, they gave up two players Doug Weight and Tony Amonte, who would have been first liners on the team for another decade. That team had been close to the Cup before. Two seasons before raising the Cup, the Messier led team won the President's trophy for most points in the league and had they gotten past Lemieux and Jagr they would very likely have won in 92'. Two years later, it was clear to Neil Smith who and what was needed to make a deep playoff run. He saw who failed two years earlier and he saw what caused that team's downfall. He traded scorer Mike Gartner and replaced him with veteran grit and acquired other veteran types to supplement the stars he had in Messier, Leetch, Zubov and Graves.
Back to my main point. Not to take anything away from the 11'-12' incarnation of the Rangers, but they are not the 94' Rangers. First of all, they have not been close before. This team has won 4 playoff games in the last 3 seasons. Many of the primary players have one year of playoff experience. There is no way to tell at this point who will be the Brad Marchand of this year's playoffs. This team will not be the most skilled in the playoffs but it will likely be the hardest working. They will live and die though with the goaltending of Lundqvist. Because Sather does not know how this team will respond in the playoffs, he owes it to the growth of the team and the organization to stand pat this year as Neil Smith did in 92' in order to determine what this team needs to go far going forward. With the small window that exists in the current NHL salary cap era, it could be considered dangerous not to take advantage of a team as successful as this year's Rangers. The fact is though, nearly all the important players on this year's team are signed for next season and if we are to believe that the "kids" as management likes to call them, are for real, then Sather owes this team a shot at the Cup without making a big splash at the deadline. There is next year for this team and it will be advantageous in the long-term for the Rangers to stand pat like they did in 92' in order to build toward 94'.
Tuesday, February 7, 2012
The Legend of Tom Brady
Taking a break from the Rangers I felt like I had to write about the Giants win over the Patriots in some way. I have heard non-stop talk and analysis about what this loss does to the legacy of Tom Brady and it has got me thinking.
Driving to school yesterday I heard the following statements on the radio; "Joe Montana went 3-0, Brady is now 3-2, so there is no question Montana was the greater quarterback." "Brady is turning into Jim Kelly." "Brady can't perform under pressure." You get the point.
Driving to school yesterday I heard the following statements on the radio; "Joe Montana went 3-0, Brady is now 3-2, so there is no question Montana was the greater quarterback." "Brady is turning into Jim Kelly." "Brady can't perform under pressure." You get the point.
Every sports talking head, journalist, commentator, analyst and even Gisele have their opinion as to what yet another Patriots loss to the Giants in the Super Bowl ("SB") will do to Brady's legend and where it puts him in the history of great quarterbacks.
There is no single game in professional sports that makes or breaks a legend like the Super Bowl does. That being true, it takes a hell of a lot to get to a single SB . Take that single Super Bowl and multiply it by 5 and you have the amount of SBs Brady has been to. Just ask Dan Marino how tough it is to return there. Marino lost in the SB his rookie season and never made it back. The idea that the 3 Brady SB wins have been tarnished by losing twice in the SB to the same team is perplexing. Shouldn't he get kudos for just getting there at all? Montana may not have lost a SB but he did lose to the Giants in the NFC championship game. Did that change his legend? No.
It's amusing to me as someone who isn't a Patriots fan that Brady's success subsequent to his 3rd SB has actually produced his downfall. Had he and Belichick taken bows after beating the Panthers in 2005 and run off into the limelight they would have been lauded forever as invincible. But they were greedy. They wanted more. Going 18-1 actually hurt Brady more than going 0-16 would have. The legend of Brady would be stronger if Lee Evans had held onto the ball in the endzone or if Billy Cundiff had made the field goal in the AFC Championship and the Ravens had won in OT.
It obviously is unrealistic and idiotic to suggest Brady and Belicheck should have stopped while they were ahead. It is also idiotic to suggest that losing a SB should change the status of a 3 time SB winner. Looking at the history of pro sports is the best way to get a handle on understanding this and to tell whether this is a unique situation or not.
It obviously is unrealistic and idiotic to suggest Brady and Belicheck should have stopped while they were ahead. It is also idiotic to suggest that losing a SB should change the status of a 3 time SB winner. Looking at the history of pro sports is the best way to get a handle on understanding this and to tell whether this is a unique situation or not.
In looking to find the greatest players in professional sports who had the same kind of downfall, I struggled to come up with anyone in the same kind of circumstance. Wayne Gretzky won 4 Stanley Cups with the Oilers and lost his 5th shot at the Cup when the Canadiens defeated the Kings in the 93' final. Gretzky's numbers were so far superior to the rest of the sport that it had no effect on his greatness or place in history. Michael Jordan won all the finals he went to. No single position in baseball comes close to the importance of a quarterback.
The answer cannot be found in team sports. I reached the conclusion that in professional sports there is one situation analogous to Brady v. Eli or Brady v. The Giants; Roger Federer v Rafael Nadal.
Roger Federer is a legend in Tennis. He is arguably the greatest male tennis player ever. But Rafael Nadal has put a dent if not a hole in that legend. Federer had over 10 major wins before Nadal won a major tournament outside the French Open. During the height of his career, Federer beat everyone, every time, except Nadal. At first, Federer would only lose to Nadal on clay at the French Open. More recently, Nadal has moved that dominance onto other surfaces. Looking closer at the Brady v. Eli/Giants comparison to Federer v. Nadal, there are some crazy similarities.
Though one plays in a team sport and the other does not, Brady IS the Patriots. He plays by far the most important position and 9 out of 10 times a QB will be a Super Bowl MVP. Federer obviously plays for himself.
Federer was in the process of becoming a legend before Nadal, a highly touted young player, became a contender on the tennis scene. Brady had already won two Super Bowls when Eli came into the league as a highly touted draft pick.
Federer and Brady beat everyone. They did not lose; except to Eli and Nadal. Nadal and Eli have not yet eclipsed Federer and Brady, but they are sure getting close. Despite his injuries and the new presence of Novak Jokavic, Nadal is racking up major titles. At 31, Eli should have 5 or 6 top years ahead of him and with the Giants management as good as it gets, the idea Eli could tie or surpass Brady's 3 SB wins is a distinct possibility.
While Federer holds the major title record, his aura has dissipated recently and his legendary status has come into question. If he can't beat Nadal then how is he the best of all time, or even the best of his generation no matter how many times he wins? If Brady can't beat Eli and the Giants how can he be the best of his generation no matter how many times he wins?
By continuing to beat everyone on the way to semifinals and finals at majors, Federer put himself in a position to be beaten by Nadal on the biggest stage many times. Had Federer begun to lose in earlier rounds to lesser opponents, his legend would not have taken near the hit. He could have had numerous excuses. Getting older, injuries, you name it. But by continuing to beat everyone except for Nadal, Federer showed he still "had it" but just couldn't keep up with Nadal. He put himself and his legendary place in tennis history in question.
The same holds true with Brady. He didn't do it like John Elway. Elway spent the majority of his career coming up short and losing in big games. He managed to pull it together and win SBs in his last two seasons and he is now a "winner."
I disagree with everyone who says that the 2 Brady SB losses should change the way he is perceived and analyzed. If anything, Brady should be lauded for making it back to the Super Bowl so many times. He has made 5 SBs in 11 years. Off the top of my head, in recent memory only the Atlanta Braves of the 90s, the Yankees of the late 90s and early 00's and the recent Lakers teams can make that claim. (Unfortunately, we all know how that turned out for the Braves).
The problem with success is that it puts a target on your back. Rather than being the predator, you become the prey and that is never a good look for a legend. That is the new unfair reality for Brady. Wrong as it is, public perception says that losing in the SB is worse for your reputation than not making the playoffs at all. It's losing on the biggest stage. The SB gave Brady his legendary status by enabling hundreds of millions of people to watch him succeed. And now it has taken away much of what it gave him. After those 3 championships, those hundreds of millions have now watched him fail, twice, against the same opponent. Ultimately, as backwards and irrational as it is, Brady's success has actually casued his legend to fall and turned a football "god" into merely great player.
Though one plays in a team sport and the other does not, Brady IS the Patriots. He plays by far the most important position and 9 out of 10 times a QB will be a Super Bowl MVP. Federer obviously plays for himself.
Federer was in the process of becoming a legend before Nadal, a highly touted young player, became a contender on the tennis scene. Brady had already won two Super Bowls when Eli came into the league as a highly touted draft pick.
Federer and Brady beat everyone. They did not lose; except to Eli and Nadal. Nadal and Eli have not yet eclipsed Federer and Brady, but they are sure getting close. Despite his injuries and the new presence of Novak Jokavic, Nadal is racking up major titles. At 31, Eli should have 5 or 6 top years ahead of him and with the Giants management as good as it gets, the idea Eli could tie or surpass Brady's 3 SB wins is a distinct possibility.
While Federer holds the major title record, his aura has dissipated recently and his legendary status has come into question. If he can't beat Nadal then how is he the best of all time, or even the best of his generation no matter how many times he wins? If Brady can't beat Eli and the Giants how can he be the best of his generation no matter how many times he wins?
By continuing to beat everyone on the way to semifinals and finals at majors, Federer put himself in a position to be beaten by Nadal on the biggest stage many times. Had Federer begun to lose in earlier rounds to lesser opponents, his legend would not have taken near the hit. He could have had numerous excuses. Getting older, injuries, you name it. But by continuing to beat everyone except for Nadal, Federer showed he still "had it" but just couldn't keep up with Nadal. He put himself and his legendary place in tennis history in question.
The same holds true with Brady. He didn't do it like John Elway. Elway spent the majority of his career coming up short and losing in big games. He managed to pull it together and win SBs in his last two seasons and he is now a "winner."
I disagree with everyone who says that the 2 Brady SB losses should change the way he is perceived and analyzed. If anything, Brady should be lauded for making it back to the Super Bowl so many times. He has made 5 SBs in 11 years. Off the top of my head, in recent memory only the Atlanta Braves of the 90s, the Yankees of the late 90s and early 00's and the recent Lakers teams can make that claim. (Unfortunately, we all know how that turned out for the Braves).
The problem with success is that it puts a target on your back. Rather than being the predator, you become the prey and that is never a good look for a legend. That is the new unfair reality for Brady. Wrong as it is, public perception says that losing in the SB is worse for your reputation than not making the playoffs at all. It's losing on the biggest stage. The SB gave Brady his legendary status by enabling hundreds of millions of people to watch him succeed. And now it has taken away much of what it gave him. After those 3 championships, those hundreds of millions have now watched him fail, twice, against the same opponent. Ultimately, as backwards and irrational as it is, Brady's success has actually casued his legend to fall and turned a football "god" into merely great player.
Wednesday, February 1, 2012
Glen Sather's Best and Worst Moves Since the Lockout
Not being the biggest Glen Sather fan I'd like to give him the benefit of the doubt with this season's great first half. Nevertheless, I have read a number of articles the past few years on his worst moves as GM and now want to give my own take on his 4 best and 4 worst trades or free agent signings since the lockout.
Please feel free to comment, argue, or complain.
The 4 Best
2) Signing Dan Girardi
Though he played for the Rangers minor league team during the lockout, Girardi was not signed to an NHL deal until the summer of 2006. Whoever found this guy off the scrap heap that is undrafted free agents, deserves a promotion. Girardi is the epitome of consistency, durability and heart. He may not be the greatest hockey player but he does all the small things right and is as reliable as almost anyone in the league on defense. Even his offense has picked up the last couple of seasons. He has shown this year in Marc Staal's absence that he is the force behind stopping opposing teams top lines. He is the longest tenured Ranger aside from Lundqvist and I wish at some point (it's not going to happen) they take the A off of Staal and give it to Girardi.
4) Trading Jason Ward, Marc-Andre Cliche and a 3rd round pick to LA for Sean Avery
This one goes back to the earlier post-lockout days. I remember sitting at a Ranger game and my brother texted me that they had made this trade and gotten Avery. It seemed to make sense at the time considering the team at that time lacked much grit with the core players being Jagr, Nylander and Straka. I don't think anyone could have predicted the impact Avery would end up having. When given the opportunity, Avery was able to blossom and given the right care and handling he was able to be a hugely impactful player. Though it's clear that Tom Renney utilized Avery far better than John Tortorella who it can be argued did not give Avery a fair shot, no one can deny the impact this trade had on the organization.
The 4 Worst
As these deals happened the same day and were done in conjunction with one another I'm taking the liberty of considering them one move for my purposes. It seems everyone is a second-guesser when it comes to these deals as I don't really remember anyone complaining after Sather managed to sign both these guys on that ill-fated July 1st, 2007 day. These horrendous signings are compunded with the fact that they meant the de facto departure of Michael Nylander and disruption of what had been a highly effective couple of years on the Rangers for Jaromir Jagr. These moves are not ranked number 1 for the sole reason that Sather managed to get out from under these deals before their terms were over. He managed to turn the Gomez signing into a positive (as seen above) and benefited from buying out Drury before his contract expired. Without that help, there would likely be no Brad Richards of Marian Gaborik on the Rangers and the makeup of the team would not be promising. Imagine if Gomez and Drury were still on the team. Over 14 million dollars, over 14 million dollars, over 14 million dollars. Over 14 million is the combined cap hit of the Drury and Gomez contracts. That's about 1/4 of the entire salary cap. Disaster was averted but even so these deals did set the organization back a couple of years and hurt their ability to be true contenders for a number of seasons.
Again, feel free to comment as I'm sure eveyone has their own opinion on this topic.
Please feel free to comment, argue, or complain.
The 4 Best
1) Trading Scott Gomez to Montreal and Tom Pyatt for Chris Higgins, Ryan McDonough and Pavel Valentenko
Talk about cleaning up your own mess. Sather took one of his worst moves as GM in signing Gomez to a monstrous long-term deal and turned the Gomez signing into a huge plus. People seem to forget that Gomez had a pretty strong first year with the Rangers. Clearly the experiment playing with Jagr didn't work but his line with Shanahan and Avery played a pivotal role in getting the team to the second round of the playoffs. The second year though was pretty bad and obviously not worth what they were paying him.
And SOMEHOW, Sather turned this into a positive. I'm not the first person to point this out but I still have no clue what former Habs GM Bob Gainey was thinking during the Summer of 2009. With players like Marian Gaborik and Marian Hossa going on the free agent market among others, Gainey was willing to take Scott Gomez and the cap hit that came with him off of Sather's hands.
And if only Gainey had taken Gomez from the Rangers for a mid-round draftpick it would have been a steal for the Rangers. Yet SOMEHOW Gainey agreed to add former first round pick and now the Rangers number 2 defenseman this year to the trade. WOW.
One more thing, what were the Rangers able to do with the 7 million saved by trading Gomez? They were able to sign Marian Gaborik who without that 7 million saved from the Gomez deal would be playing somewhere else.
There is still no way for Gainey to justify this trade or his thought process in making it. Justification from Gainey or not, this trade had MAJOR postive ramifications for the Rangers and is easily Sather's best since the lockout.
And SOMEHOW, Sather turned this into a positive. I'm not the first person to point this out but I still have no clue what former Habs GM Bob Gainey was thinking during the Summer of 2009. With players like Marian Gaborik and Marian Hossa going on the free agent market among others, Gainey was willing to take Scott Gomez and the cap hit that came with him off of Sather's hands.
And if only Gainey had taken Gomez from the Rangers for a mid-round draftpick it would have been a steal for the Rangers. Yet SOMEHOW Gainey agreed to add former first round pick and now the Rangers number 2 defenseman this year to the trade. WOW.
One more thing, what were the Rangers able to do with the 7 million saved by trading Gomez? They were able to sign Marian Gaborik who without that 7 million saved from the Gomez deal would be playing somewhere else.
There is still no way for Gainey to justify this trade or his thought process in making it. Justification from Gainey or not, this trade had MAJOR postive ramifications for the Rangers and is easily Sather's best since the lockout.
2) Signing Dan Girardi
Though he played for the Rangers minor league team during the lockout, Girardi was not signed to an NHL deal until the summer of 2006. Whoever found this guy off the scrap heap that is undrafted free agents, deserves a promotion. Girardi is the epitome of consistency, durability and heart. He may not be the greatest hockey player but he does all the small things right and is as reliable as almost anyone in the league on defense. Even his offense has picked up the last couple of seasons. He has shown this year in Marc Staal's absence that he is the force behind stopping opposing teams top lines. He is the longest tenured Ranger aside from Lundqvist and I wish at some point (it's not going to happen) they take the A off of Staal and give it to Girardi.
3) Signing Marian Gaborik
Many pundits scoffed at the idea of Sather signing the oft-injured Gaborik to a 5 year 35 million dollar deal after the 08-09 season. I liked the move at the time but was wary of Gabby's injury history. He was the best pure scorer on the market so it was worth a shot. Though last season, his second on Broadway, was injury-riddled and inconsistent, the first and third seasons that sandwich season two have proven Gaborik is the real deal and Sather made out outstandingly well in signing him.
Many pundits scoffed at the idea of Sather signing the oft-injured Gaborik to a 5 year 35 million dollar deal after the 08-09 season. I liked the move at the time but was wary of Gabby's injury history. He was the best pure scorer on the market so it was worth a shot. Though last season, his second on Broadway, was injury-riddled and inconsistent, the first and third seasons that sandwich season two have proven Gaborik is the real deal and Sather made out outstandingly well in signing him.
4) Trading Jason Ward, Marc-Andre Cliche and a 3rd round pick to LA for Sean Avery
This one goes back to the earlier post-lockout days. I remember sitting at a Ranger game and my brother texted me that they had made this trade and gotten Avery. It seemed to make sense at the time considering the team at that time lacked much grit with the core players being Jagr, Nylander and Straka. I don't think anyone could have predicted the impact Avery would end up having. When given the opportunity, Avery was able to blossom and given the right care and handling he was able to be a hugely impactful player. Though it's clear that Tom Renney utilized Avery far better than John Tortorella who it can be argued did not give Avery a fair shot, no one can deny the impact this trade had on the organization.
The 4 Worst
1) Signing Wade Redden
Ugh. Even in exile in Connecticut Redden continues to make those of us who are Cablevision subscribers pay higher fees. Sather gave Redden a huge 6 year contract at about 6 million a year after a number of down years with the hope that the new surroundings would rejuvenate Redden and return him to the days when he was a top defenseman. Boy was Sather wrong. The inventor and founder of what we at the Rotenberg house like to call "The Wade Redden School of Defense" ("TWRSD"), Redden floundered with the Rangers (TWRSD teaches that rather than attempting to defend by hitting the opposition or blocking passing or shooting lanes, defenseman should go to their knees or slide across the slot to screen the goalie with the blind hope of blocking a shot or stopping a pass). Not only did Redden not return to his glory days in the league but Redden was actually worse. It makes you question whether or not Glen Sather actually watches players play before signing them. He played a timid defense and much of the time seemed either disinterested or scared. His offensive abilities, if he had any, were for the most part dormant. Had Redden been the Rangers 5th or 6th defenseman signed for 1.5 million then he could have been extremely useful but for the contract Sather gave him this becomes the worst move of Sather's tenure. This kind of move would cost many GMs their jobs but due to Jim Dolan's deep pockets and obvious deep trust of Sather, Sather was allowed to banish his mistake in the minors to avoid a crippling 6 million dollar cap hit for a marginal player.
Ugh. Even in exile in Connecticut Redden continues to make those of us who are Cablevision subscribers pay higher fees. Sather gave Redden a huge 6 year contract at about 6 million a year after a number of down years with the hope that the new surroundings would rejuvenate Redden and return him to the days when he was a top defenseman. Boy was Sather wrong. The inventor and founder of what we at the Rotenberg house like to call "The Wade Redden School of Defense" ("TWRSD"), Redden floundered with the Rangers (TWRSD teaches that rather than attempting to defend by hitting the opposition or blocking passing or shooting lanes, defenseman should go to their knees or slide across the slot to screen the goalie with the blind hope of blocking a shot or stopping a pass). Not only did Redden not return to his glory days in the league but Redden was actually worse. It makes you question whether or not Glen Sather actually watches players play before signing them. He played a timid defense and much of the time seemed either disinterested or scared. His offensive abilities, if he had any, were for the most part dormant. Had Redden been the Rangers 5th or 6th defenseman signed for 1.5 million then he could have been extremely useful but for the contract Sather gave him this becomes the worst move of Sather's tenure. This kind of move would cost many GMs their jobs but due to Jim Dolan's deep pockets and obvious deep trust of Sather, Sather was allowed to banish his mistake in the minors to avoid a crippling 6 million dollar cap hit for a marginal player.
2) Signing Chris Drury/Scott Gomez
As these deals happened the same day and were done in conjunction with one another I'm taking the liberty of considering them one move for my purposes. It seems everyone is a second-guesser when it comes to these deals as I don't really remember anyone complaining after Sather managed to sign both these guys on that ill-fated July 1st, 2007 day. These horrendous signings are compunded with the fact that they meant the de facto departure of Michael Nylander and disruption of what had been a highly effective couple of years on the Rangers for Jaromir Jagr. These moves are not ranked number 1 for the sole reason that Sather managed to get out from under these deals before their terms were over. He managed to turn the Gomez signing into a positive (as seen above) and benefited from buying out Drury before his contract expired. Without that help, there would likely be no Brad Richards of Marian Gaborik on the Rangers and the makeup of the team would not be promising. Imagine if Gomez and Drury were still on the team. Over 14 million dollars, over 14 million dollars, over 14 million dollars. Over 14 million is the combined cap hit of the Drury and Gomez contracts. That's about 1/4 of the entire salary cap. Disaster was averted but even so these deals did set the organization back a couple of years and hurt their ability to be true contenders for a number of seasons.
3) Signing Michael Roszival to a 4 year 20 million dollar deal
Does Glen Sather actually watch his team play? For probably two years prior to Rozsival signing this deal his play had slowly deteriorated. His confidence with the puck had become non-existent and he seemed be afraid to actually pull the trigger on shots. Roszival is clearly a nice guy and was integral part of the post-lockout team defense but re-signing him to such a deal the same offseason Sather gave Redden his contract was absurd. What did Sather get out of this deal? Wojtek Wolski, aka Phoenix's overpriced equivalent of Roszival.
Does Glen Sather actually watch his team play? For probably two years prior to Rozsival signing this deal his play had slowly deteriorated. His confidence with the puck had become non-existent and he seemed be afraid to actually pull the trigger on shots. Roszival is clearly a nice guy and was integral part of the post-lockout team defense but re-signing him to such a deal the same offseason Sather gave Redden his contract was absurd. What did Sather get out of this deal? Wojtek Wolski, aka Phoenix's overpriced equivalent of Roszival.
4) Signing Donald Brashear to a 2 year deal
Really? Forget the fiscal impact this deal had or didn't have. If you don't remember game 6 against the Caps in the playoffs the spring before the Rangers signed him, Brashear laid out Blair Betts on a what appeared to be a late hit that went unpenalized and surely played a role in the Rangers blowing a 3-1 series lead over the Caps. Sather then essentially invited Rangers public enemy number 1 to join the team. Thankfully, this marriage did not last very long and Brashear's relationship with the coaching staff quickly soured. He was sent packing for long-forgotten Todd White. Either way, the Brashear signing left pretty much everyone shaking their head.
Really? Forget the fiscal impact this deal had or didn't have. If you don't remember game 6 against the Caps in the playoffs the spring before the Rangers signed him, Brashear laid out Blair Betts on a what appeared to be a late hit that went unpenalized and surely played a role in the Rangers blowing a 3-1 series lead over the Caps. Sather then essentially invited Rangers public enemy number 1 to join the team. Thankfully, this marriage did not last very long and Brashear's relationship with the coaching staff quickly soured. He was sent packing for long-forgotten Todd White. Either way, the Brashear signing left pretty much everyone shaking their head.
Again, feel free to comment as I'm sure eveyone has their own opinion on this topic.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)