Before we get to the news of today, let's get to the news of Thursday night.
I didn't get to see as much of the game as I wanted to - would have liked to spend more time studying the new guys like Zuccarello and Stepan - but what I saw, I liked. I liked the way the team looked, even if it was just pre-season. Even if it wasn't a Hall of Fame goalie the Rangers faced in net for NJ.
Oh wait, that was future Hall of Famer Brodeur?
Then just how nice were those goals by Frolov and Boyle huh? I loved that!!
Overall though, Stepan played with poise and looked quite comfortable in his role with top players - Frolov and Gaborik. In my mind, if he's good enough and almost close enough - let him do it. We may just be lucky enough to have that good a talent that young. (Makes me all the more mad we have to make room for Drury when he comes back - see last post - but it makes me all the more happy we have a guy like Stepan on the way).
Boyle had a good game, and showed two sides of his game: ability to step in and fight, and ability to use his body to gain position. His goal was actually pretty sweet. Brodeur wasn't given a ton of help from defense - it seemed at times - but, he was beaten by Boyle here, and Frolov, and both were very nice goals.
Frolov made a nice first impression, Gaborik (2 goals including Game Winner) picked up right where he left off. Prust had a very nice fight. Staal played almost 30 minutes in the game - what else is new?
Very happy, and very excited hockey is back!!
____________________________________
It'll be said a hundred times today about Redden:
Haha!
Well deserved!
About time!
Thank goodness!
Redden needed to go to Hartford, this year, if not last year. It was too much money to tie up in one player that was certainly not worth it now, was maybe never worth it. We expected it would happen, but we weren't sure it would. Although given the math, we didn't see how it could possibly not happen. This morning, it finally did.
And many such variations.
However, I don't think many people will be saying this, so I will:
While it is Wade Reddens' responsibility that he's not playing up to his contract, - it is NOT his responsibility that it was given to him. He didn't ask for the $39 million Sather threw at him, undeservingly though it may be. No one would ever have expected him not to take it.
So while everyone is happy today that he has finally been waived, the NYRs can finally move on, a small part of me feels bad for Redden the person. He did what almost every human being would do - took what was given to him. And now, his life will change because of something he never really had control of.
I know that's business, and I know that's life, but a small part of me feels for the guy beyond the athlete and beyond the Ranger.
Showing posts with label Wade Redden. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Wade Redden. Show all posts
Saturday, September 25, 2010
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Five Things About the Rangers/Senators Game. . .
* I tried to watch the Rangers defensemen more closely. Thought Redden had a good start to the game in terms of offensive movement. Chipping the puck, a few nice little passes, smart plays at the blue line and neutral zone. As the game went on, he had a few more. This is the most composed I've seen him in a while AND he was in Ottawa. Interesting.
* In case you were late getting back for the 3rd period, MSG announced that Prospal's shorthanded goal was the ONLY shorthanded goal of his career. Kinda seems hard to believe, but I don't know how much PK time he had in Tampa, I'll be honest. And as much as I have to hold my breath everytime Gaborik is on the ice down a man, this is a benefit of having him there - the chance to get some offense. The Rangers used to get a lot of shorties when the Czechmates like Dvorak and Nedved were on PK duty.
* This team has serious offensive problems. They can't seem to buy a goal. Earlier in the season the Rangers had a bunch of scoring from defensemen which made their totals look better (they were leading the league in goals scored for a whlie) but it seems everyone has stopped scoring at once. Except for...well, the guys that always do - Gaborik and Prospal. Them and whomever is called up for the game from Hartford.
* Can someone tell me where the team that was supposed to go-go-go went to? I know the Rangers usually take a winter nap in November or December, but there is little excuse when this team doesn't hit, doesn't skate, and doesn't play with some level of tenacity. I find it hard to believe Tortorella is happy with the effort in that regard. As a fan, I'm not happy with the way they've regressed.
* One sign these aren't last year's Rangers - it's almost American Thanksgiving and this was their first shootout game. Congrats to P.A. Parenteau for getting the deciding goal in the skills contest, in front of his family and friends. Good for him and he (and Hank) stole the Rangers two points tonight.
* In case you were late getting back for the 3rd period, MSG announced that Prospal's shorthanded goal was the ONLY shorthanded goal of his career. Kinda seems hard to believe, but I don't know how much PK time he had in Tampa, I'll be honest. And as much as I have to hold my breath everytime Gaborik is on the ice down a man, this is a benefit of having him there - the chance to get some offense. The Rangers used to get a lot of shorties when the Czechmates like Dvorak and Nedved were on PK duty.
* This team has serious offensive problems. They can't seem to buy a goal. Earlier in the season the Rangers had a bunch of scoring from defensemen which made their totals look better (they were leading the league in goals scored for a whlie) but it seems everyone has stopped scoring at once. Except for...well, the guys that always do - Gaborik and Prospal. Them and whomever is called up for the game from Hartford.
* Can someone tell me where the team that was supposed to go-go-go went to? I know the Rangers usually take a winter nap in November or December, but there is little excuse when this team doesn't hit, doesn't skate, and doesn't play with some level of tenacity. I find it hard to believe Tortorella is happy with the effort in that regard. As a fan, I'm not happy with the way they've regressed.
* One sign these aren't last year's Rangers - it's almost American Thanksgiving and this was their first shootout game. Congrats to P.A. Parenteau for getting the deciding goal in the skills contest, in front of his family and friends. Good for him and he (and Hank) stole the Rangers two points tonight.
Sunday, October 18, 2009
HNIC Wrap-Up ~ October 17, 2009. . .
In the pre-game to HNIC, PJ, Milbury, Hrudey, McLean talk with former Habs coach Guy Carbonneau.
Carbonneau mentioned his relationship with former Hab Alex Kovalev was better than the media/city let on. They used to golf together on off days. And the two day break he was asked to take? Purely to rest his mind. Not personal at all.
PJ said the Habs top big/small line of Gomez/Cammalleri/Gionta is getting pushed out of plays because of their size and that both Ottawa and the Canadiens are suffering from defensive breakdowns and no offense from the backend.
On the New York Rangers, Milbury - yes, that Milbury - praised the Rangers for actually having a first line again. Said Dubinsky could be a bonafide star in this league, said Prospal was a nice surprise, and that Gaborik was ...well Gaborik. Said this enabled Drury to go down to the #2 line where he they can mix and match between Callahan, Higgins, Avery, whomever.
The group spoke about camp "Torture-ella" and how it made such a big difference, because the team was in shape and were having great third periods. Hrudey credited the new Tortorella in-shape motto and system of play, for helping make Wade Redden better this season so far.
Elliotte Friedman interviewed Tortorella who admitted Redden was in "terrible" shape last year when he took over as coach. And said that the biggest difference was Wade being in such good shape this year. Said he wasn't "chasing the game" like he was last year.
He also, for the record, said he and Avery had a good relationship and were on the same page.
For the sake of the team, let's hope so.
______________________________________________________________
HNIC does such a great job with Inside Hockey and this week is no different with the story of Scott Walker.
Scott asked out his wife 20 years ago, with a free dinner coupon for being player of the game, and they have never been apart since.
During the playoff series with Boston, where he scored the game winning goal in overtime, his first ever playoff goal, he was going through personal turmoil.
The day that he punched out former Bruin (and now teammate Aaron Ward) was the day he found out his wife had cervical cancer.
Kinda puts that in perspective a little more, doesn't it?
He and Aaron Ward have put the incident behind them. His wife is now healthy.
She urges women to never miss their annual appointments, something I myself must encourage. You just never know.
___________________________________________
My DirecTV turned off After Hours once the Wild/Canucks game was over, so I had to play catchup today. I was not thrilled with that - pretty angry, in fact - but since it was 12:30 I decided to read a book and not make what I'm sure would have been an angry phone call.
Brent Burns was their first guess. I haven't caught up with him since the Inside HOckey segment they alluded to, from 2 years ago, and apparently his then girlfiend Susan, is now his wife, and he still has around 100 animals in his home. Mostly lizard/snake type animals, which makes my skin crawl, but he still has four Siberian Huskies, which makes me smile.
Sykora and Havlat, the new Czechs, have apparently been bugging him to come see.
All I have to say is WHAT an understanding wife he has!!
__________________________________________
Later on Kevin Bieska, a Bowling Green graduate, says he and Willie Mitchell constantly argue who is smarter on finance. Bieksa gives the nod to himself.
"I don't think we have the smartest team in the league," he continues. And then he points out Hordicuk and Burrows as examples of needing financial advice.
Ouch!
And on the funny side, he fought one time Ranger Fedor Federov when he at a pub w/players from the Manitoba Moose, and was so nervous he was going to be cut before he even played w/the team. Guess he didn't have to be nervous. Burke liked him and signed him immediately.
____________________________________________
And lastly, a new After Hours Feature: Tips from Weekes' Beauty Bag.
This week: Use facewash and facial cleanser. Guys, girls, everyone!
Til next week...
Carbonneau mentioned his relationship with former Hab Alex Kovalev was better than the media/city let on. They used to golf together on off days. And the two day break he was asked to take? Purely to rest his mind. Not personal at all.
PJ said the Habs top big/small line of Gomez/Cammalleri/Gionta is getting pushed out of plays because of their size and that both Ottawa and the Canadiens are suffering from defensive breakdowns and no offense from the backend.
On the New York Rangers, Milbury - yes, that Milbury - praised the Rangers for actually having a first line again. Said Dubinsky could be a bonafide star in this league, said Prospal was a nice surprise, and that Gaborik was ...well Gaborik. Said this enabled Drury to go down to the #2 line where he they can mix and match between Callahan, Higgins, Avery, whomever.
The group spoke about camp "Torture-ella" and how it made such a big difference, because the team was in shape and were having great third periods. Hrudey credited the new Tortorella in-shape motto and system of play, for helping make Wade Redden better this season so far.
Elliotte Friedman interviewed Tortorella who admitted Redden was in "terrible" shape last year when he took over as coach. And said that the biggest difference was Wade being in such good shape this year. Said he wasn't "chasing the game" like he was last year.
He also, for the record, said he and Avery had a good relationship and were on the same page.
For the sake of the team, let's hope so.
______________________________________________________________
HNIC does such a great job with Inside Hockey and this week is no different with the story of Scott Walker.
Scott asked out his wife 20 years ago, with a free dinner coupon for being player of the game, and they have never been apart since.
During the playoff series with Boston, where he scored the game winning goal in overtime, his first ever playoff goal, he was going through personal turmoil.
The day that he punched out former Bruin (and now teammate Aaron Ward) was the day he found out his wife had cervical cancer.
Kinda puts that in perspective a little more, doesn't it?
He and Aaron Ward have put the incident behind them. His wife is now healthy.
She urges women to never miss their annual appointments, something I myself must encourage. You just never know.
___________________________________________
My DirecTV turned off After Hours once the Wild/Canucks game was over, so I had to play catchup today. I was not thrilled with that - pretty angry, in fact - but since it was 12:30 I decided to read a book and not make what I'm sure would have been an angry phone call.
Brent Burns was their first guess. I haven't caught up with him since the Inside HOckey segment they alluded to, from 2 years ago, and apparently his then girlfiend Susan, is now his wife, and he still has around 100 animals in his home. Mostly lizard/snake type animals, which makes my skin crawl, but he still has four Siberian Huskies, which makes me smile.
Sykora and Havlat, the new Czechs, have apparently been bugging him to come see.
All I have to say is WHAT an understanding wife he has!!
__________________________________________
Later on Kevin Bieska, a Bowling Green graduate, says he and Willie Mitchell constantly argue who is smarter on finance. Bieksa gives the nod to himself.
"I don't think we have the smartest team in the league," he continues. And then he points out Hordicuk and Burrows as examples of needing financial advice.
Ouch!
And on the funny side, he fought one time Ranger Fedor Federov when he at a pub w/players from the Manitoba Moose, and was so nervous he was going to be cut before he even played w/the team. Guess he didn't have to be nervous. Burke liked him and signed him immediately.
____________________________________________
And lastly, a new After Hours Feature: Tips from Weekes' Beauty Bag.
This week: Use facewash and facial cleanser. Guys, girls, everyone!
Til next week...
Sunday, May 3, 2009
Rangers Season In Review/Part One: The Players and the Payroll Factor. . .
If the Rangers weren't doomed from the start of the 2007-2008 season by the decisions made in the off-season, they were most certainly doomed by the start of the 2008-2009 campaign. This is something I highlighted extensively during last summer, long before the current team even took to the ice.
In "Does it Really All Add Up, Rangers Fans?" I used simple mathmatics to explain why the Rangers were, without a doubt, screwed. And screwed not just for the immediate season ahead, but for the better part of the next decade. Why? Because they had chosen to tie up essentially half their cap allotment in four players, only one of whom was an important component to their team. Those players were Gomez, Drury, Redden, and Lundqvist.
I guess I don't have to tell you which one was the "important component" now do I?
Once again, we must focus on the chosen three, not because they are chosen for greatness, but because, for reasons still unknown to, well, just about everybody, they were chosen to make the most money for Broadway's team.
#19
Gomez, in dollars and cents, makes the most money on this team at approximately 7.357 million per season. His actual salary for this year was $10 million.
Scott Gomez did absolutely nothing to warrant this type of money. That, in this post-lockout new NHL, is superstar money. And Gomez, whether you like him or hate him, you must admit is simply not worth that type of money. Never was, never will be. I said that before he ever played a game in New York and I say that again, two years into his seven year deal.
But when you pay a given player the most money on your team, it does a few things. It makes whatever line he is playing on the "#1 line." It makes him a focal point of all things good and bad with the team. And it makes him someone that people will look to - for results, for point production, for positive attitude, for leadership.
No, Scott Gomez's folly was not in his not being worth $7.357 million. His folly was in being none of those things that the Rangers needed their top money maker to be. A result getter. A point producer. A positive influence. Or a leader. Gomez was none of this.
If possible, Gomez looked even worse this year than he did the year before, this time floundering without any Jagr or Straka to hang on to. Not only did he not make himself look better, he failed to make anyone else on this team look good for more than a fraction of a moment in time. He'd have a good game, maybe two, and then fall right back off into obscurity.
When he wasn't gone off the map, he was the focal point. Oh yes, the focal point for undisciplined penalties and moronic plays. I wouldn't want to be the judge of a contest over which Rangers player made the most moronic gaffs this season, but Gomez would have to have been a finalist.
I think back to the game in Dallas in early February for two reasons. One, for the Dallas announcers calling Gomez's early pass "vacuous" and two, for him saying "this is not rock bottom." Vacuous stuck with me because it became the perfect analogy for so much the Rangers and Gomez did. They did such rookie things on the ice without seemingly any thought to the fact that they were actual honest to goodness hockey players in the NHL and not kids in pee-wees. And as for the "rock bottom" comment, that stuck with me, of course, because it got worse after that, and I always wonder whether Gomez knew something that we didn't.
But, no, it was not his failure to score points or his uncanny ability to weave the puck into the offensive zone and have it slide harmlessly off his stick, that made me loathe his being stuck on this team for five more years.
What can be worse, you ask yourself?
I never once, in all Gomez's saying "we're professionals" believe he truly understood what that meant. He strikes me as the perfect example of someone who saw how wonderful the players in New York had it and wanted to come there. Face it, he already won more than many players ever will in the league with what he won in NJ. He boasts two Stanley Cups. Some players will never win one. So he signs for a ton of money in New York and, really, who can blame him? New York apartment, New York scene. Oh yeah and play some hockey in between.
When he was in NJ, I used to think Gomez was a moron. Even when he was signed to be a Ranger, I got sick to my stomach at the thought. He always struck me as a little bit of a "punk."
What, save a few Garden of Dreams events - which are very admirable, yes - has he done to make anyone think he is any less the punk he was in New Jersey? Seriously give me one example of what he's done to prove to anyone he's matured beyond a guy that was blessed with speed and was able to fool many into thinking he was an elite hockey player in this league?
I used to think his interviews where he kidded with John Giannone about his wardrobe were cute - the first dozen times - but if that is really - really! - all he brings to this team is a funny interview, I question why they need him on the ice.
And after he did that during a playoff interview, I seriously questioned - for the hundreth time this year - just where his head was at.
If I'm making the most money on an original six team and playing in the biggest US market for a team like the New York Rangers, I can't promise the world but I should be able to promise to have my head on straight.
Gomez, I'm afraid, has never proven to me that he is capable of being a professional and having his head in the right place. He's also never proven to me that he has realized that he isn't and that he doesn't. And I actually do not know which is worse.
#23
I am saving some words on Chris Drury for Part 2 of this already incredibly long Season in Review segment. So we'll just stick to the basics here.
The Rangers signed Chris Drury because he was "clutch." They signed Chris Drury because he had been labeled a "winner." He had won at every level - Little League baseball, collegiate hockey, the NHL.
Therefore he was a "must-get."
I feel worse for Drury than I do for Gomez, because I actually believe Chris Drury wanted to do well and is upset with himself that he hasn't.
BUT, none of that makes me feel sorry for him that he, too, is making $7.050 million per season and that he had done little and has done little to warrant it.
The history of being a winner only means so much. It only means something if you can bring something tangible with you.
Drury, at his best, was inconsistent this year.
Drury, at his worst, wasn't good enough.
That's not including his playoff run where he played, admirably, with a broken hand. That is an admirable thing and that showed that he cares more about the team than himself.
I actually would never argue that fact, that Drury cares more about the team than himself. I would however admit that, sadly enough, that hasn't mean very much.
Drury, like Gomez, would be amazing on faceoffs one game, and dreadful the next. I've never, in all my watching hockey seen such inconsistency as I saw with this year's team.
Now sure, some of that, perhaps, can be blamed on the coaches, the systems, or the lack thereof, but the bottom line is a player decides on a given night if he is going to come to play or not. Not whether he will play or how much he will play or in what way he will play, but if he is going to be ready to play.
Again, I'm not sure how much this was evident in Drury's performance. In his case, perhaps, it was not a matter of caring too little but caring too much. Either way, Drury seemed ill-committed at times. Nervous. Confused.
Not what you'd want or expect from a $7 million dollar a year player.
And point production? Surely he didn't have that. Making others around him better? I cannot with honesty say I am sure he did that either.
Sometimes it is not your fault. Sometimes you just aren't good enough to live up to all the good things people want to believe about you.
Perhaps Chris Drury is clutch and perhaps he is a winner. But it means two different things to win on a team playing a team game as part of a unit and to win on a team playing a team game when you have the responsibility of being one of the biggest parts of that unit.
I have yet to see that push and that desire from Drury when he has been in New York. He scored a few game tying goals last season, one to force an Edmonton game to overtime, specifically.
This year we saw a gutsy playoff goal from Drury in game 4, which turned out to be a game winner.
This was, perhaps, the most clutch moment he had since joining the Rangers.
It was perhaps his only truly clutch moment, with two years down and three to go on his contract.
I like Chris Drury just fine. But the problem with having a great past as a winner and a clutch performer is that if you don't continue to live up to it, you will always be deemed a failure in those places you did not succeed.
It's a shame, but it's simply the truth.
#6
When all is said and done, not Scott Gomez, not Chris Drury, but Wade Redden, will go down as having the worst contract in the history of the New York Rangers.
When I heard the news that the Rangers got Redden, my immediate reaction was to vomit over a theatre balcony. (True story)
I said Wade Redden was the last player I wanted on this team. The last, and that it killed me that he was not only on this team, but on this team for that money and for that many years.
Disgraceful.
To Redden's discredit, he did nothing to prove us nay-sayers wrong. He began the season with a bit of a snap and a goal in Prague and gave an interview where he said he was so "excited" to be playing with this team and excited to come back and play in New York.
He'd come back, indeed, and score another goal at opening night at the Garden against the Blackhawks.
Goodness hopes he had a long memory because it would be four and a half months, two head coaches, and 58 games later that he'd score again.
6.5 million for a guy that scored 3 goals all year. A guy that was, presumably, hired to be the powerplay quarterback, was a big part of the second to worst powerplay in the entire league.
His best year, numerically, was 2005-2006, where he scored 10 goals, 40 assists and was a plus 35. His best powerplay year, came in 2003-2004 when he scored 12 of his 17 goals with the man advantage.
Problem was, that his last two years in Ottawa produced paltry numbers compared to the three seasons prior. To any observer of even a handful of games in Ottawa, this was a guy that was not on the upside of anything, as I saw myself and well noted here.
And yet, he was given a contract to rival all contracts and to confound even the best of us.
You might expect me to rip into Redden here, let him have it for all he the miserable plays he made this season, for all his lack of effort and lack of goal production. But I'm not.
Instead I am going to give him a teeny-tinsy break, if only for a moment, to make a point.
Wade Redden was set up to fail in New York.
You heard me.
Wade Redden, under the best of circumstances, could never have succeeded here in New York.
For Wade Redden to be worth the contract he was given, he'd have to be in the same league as Brian Leetch, when it all comes down to it.
The Rangers have searched and discarded and pushed aside defensemen, but they have never closed their arms around anyone even half the player that Brian Leetch was.
For Brian Leetch was, in my opinion, the greatest player to play for the New York Rangers. There are things he could do that were so effortless and amazing that we all, each and every one of us, took them for granted. Took for granted that night in and night out, you'd have the most consistent, hard working, professional, and talented player play for your team.
In the years Leetch was here and in the years he's been gone, no one has even come close.
Wade Redden, in his best years, wasn't half the player Brian Leetch was.
And I mean what I am going to say next with no personal disrespect to Wade Redden, the person, but he is not even fit to sharpen Brian Leetch's skates.
That's how far off the reservation of elite NHL defensemen Wade Redden is.
And yet, he is making money comparable to what the Rangers would pay an elite defenseman of Brian's stature.
(Sure, yes, agreed, Brian Leetch would deserve much, much more, in reality, but bear with me here.)
And that - not his lack of skill, not his lack of poise, not his lack of guts -, that is why Wade Redden was doomed to fail here.
Because he is not even worth half that much, or a third of that much. And yet by giving that money to him, we all expect just too much from a man that has, sadly, nothing really left to give.
And now, the niceness stops.
Forget the dismal powerplay and Redden's horrific hesitancy to shoot the puck for the moment. Wade Redden did nothing, nothing!, to endear himself to this group.
He took the paycheck, but he didn't pay the price. He wasn't playing like a Ranger!, he was acting like a fraud.
Forget the numbers. Look no further than these two instances. On January 3rd, Redden got annoyed with Capitals captain Chris Clark, and he knocked him out, with a single punch.
Great, you say. Why bring this up? I bring this up because this still, to me, remains the only example in an entire 82-game season that I have of Wade Redden showing he had a pulse.
The second instance was on February 28th, in the great Avalanche/Rangers goal-fest. In an-already decided game, Colorado took to being nasty, and Dubinsky got involved with a player (Laperierre?) along the corner boards. Every other player went to his defense, and tied up someone.
Redden, in the ultimate moment of team unity, showed team indifference in refusing to drop his gloves so that he could gain an adequate hold on the Avalanche player. Instead he watched as Dubinsky was beaten not by one, but by two Colorado players.
Want to talk about being a good teammate? How about a decent human being? I've never seen a player so hesitant to get his hands dirty.
So no, Wade. It's not your lack of scoring, or your lack of powerplay precense that disappointed me. Remember, I - unlike Glennie Boy - knew in advance of July 1st that I didn't want you for $1 million, let alone $6.5 million, because you were just not good enough.
But it's your lack of pride, lack of support, and lack of anything resembling team unity that disgusted me more in the end.
Why? You can't help that you are a crappy player getting paid the money of a superstar in this league. But you can help your attitude and your committment to the game. I saw neither. And that is where I stop defending you.
Sure, you came back and found some of your game in the playoffs, and weren't a complete disaster there. But, seriously, the majority of the 82 games leading up to it were no-shows. We can't in all ethical honesty applaud a guy for showing up when the spotlight was on, when for every game that the fans and teammates wanted and needed more from him, he came up empty.
In closing Part One of this Season in Review, I feel I must state the obvious. None of these players alone is responsible for the disaster that this Rangers season was. None of these players is soley to blame or to chastise for that fact.
BUT, these three players have to shoulder the brunt of it.
Why?
Because of their salaries, other players - other necessary players that perhaps could actually do the jobs better - could not be obtained. Because of their salaries this team is handicapped and these players are, barring insanely tricky measures, untradable.
Is that their fault? No, perhaps not. Ultimately, of course, blame falls back to the Great Concoctor, Glen Sather.
But I, as a fan, would like to think that even if I were not that good, or even if the situation wasn't perfect, that I'd at least show up to every game, play with a sense of urgency, a sense of pride, and a sense of self-worth, that I'd play the best that I could every single night out, knowing, in the end, that was all I could do.
And I am quite sure that none of these three players did that on a regular basis, did the one thing they could control most.
So instead we can sum it all up with these words:
Saddled with similar $7 million dollar salaries from Free Agent Folly Day 2007, Scott Gomez and Chris Drury became married to this team and inevitably connected to its money woes. That is a fact that will remain true until they are no longer a part of this team, and will forever remain true in the memory of the years they spent here.
Wade Redden will have one distinction in his time in New York and it will have nothing to do with his talent or his lack thereof. It will be that he was, undoubtably the biggest most inexcusable folly in a long, long list of big and inexcusable follies.
**Many apologies for the length of this blog, but come on, let's face it: if you are coming here to read this site, you are not reading for quick hits and light reading, you come here to read the always rambling, sometimes scattered thoughts of a wordy individual.
Stay tuned in the coming week for a few more parts of the Season in Review.**
In "Does it Really All Add Up, Rangers Fans?" I used simple mathmatics to explain why the Rangers were, without a doubt, screwed. And screwed not just for the immediate season ahead, but for the better part of the next decade. Why? Because they had chosen to tie up essentially half their cap allotment in four players, only one of whom was an important component to their team. Those players were Gomez, Drury, Redden, and Lundqvist.
I guess I don't have to tell you which one was the "important component" now do I?
Once again, we must focus on the chosen three, not because they are chosen for greatness, but because, for reasons still unknown to, well, just about everybody, they were chosen to make the most money for Broadway's team.
#19
Gomez, in dollars and cents, makes the most money on this team at approximately 7.357 million per season. His actual salary for this year was $10 million.
Scott Gomez did absolutely nothing to warrant this type of money. That, in this post-lockout new NHL, is superstar money. And Gomez, whether you like him or hate him, you must admit is simply not worth that type of money. Never was, never will be. I said that before he ever played a game in New York and I say that again, two years into his seven year deal.
But when you pay a given player the most money on your team, it does a few things. It makes whatever line he is playing on the "#1 line." It makes him a focal point of all things good and bad with the team. And it makes him someone that people will look to - for results, for point production, for positive attitude, for leadership.
No, Scott Gomez's folly was not in his not being worth $7.357 million. His folly was in being none of those things that the Rangers needed their top money maker to be. A result getter. A point producer. A positive influence. Or a leader. Gomez was none of this.
If possible, Gomez looked even worse this year than he did the year before, this time floundering without any Jagr or Straka to hang on to. Not only did he not make himself look better, he failed to make anyone else on this team look good for more than a fraction of a moment in time. He'd have a good game, maybe two, and then fall right back off into obscurity.
When he wasn't gone off the map, he was the focal point. Oh yes, the focal point for undisciplined penalties and moronic plays. I wouldn't want to be the judge of a contest over which Rangers player made the most moronic gaffs this season, but Gomez would have to have been a finalist.
I think back to the game in Dallas in early February for two reasons. One, for the Dallas announcers calling Gomez's early pass "vacuous" and two, for him saying "this is not rock bottom." Vacuous stuck with me because it became the perfect analogy for so much the Rangers and Gomez did. They did such rookie things on the ice without seemingly any thought to the fact that they were actual honest to goodness hockey players in the NHL and not kids in pee-wees. And as for the "rock bottom" comment, that stuck with me, of course, because it got worse after that, and I always wonder whether Gomez knew something that we didn't.
But, no, it was not his failure to score points or his uncanny ability to weave the puck into the offensive zone and have it slide harmlessly off his stick, that made me loathe his being stuck on this team for five more years.
What can be worse, you ask yourself?
I never once, in all Gomez's saying "we're professionals" believe he truly understood what that meant. He strikes me as the perfect example of someone who saw how wonderful the players in New York had it and wanted to come there. Face it, he already won more than many players ever will in the league with what he won in NJ. He boasts two Stanley Cups. Some players will never win one. So he signs for a ton of money in New York and, really, who can blame him? New York apartment, New York scene. Oh yeah and play some hockey in between.
When he was in NJ, I used to think Gomez was a moron. Even when he was signed to be a Ranger, I got sick to my stomach at the thought. He always struck me as a little bit of a "punk."
What, save a few Garden of Dreams events - which are very admirable, yes - has he done to make anyone think he is any less the punk he was in New Jersey? Seriously give me one example of what he's done to prove to anyone he's matured beyond a guy that was blessed with speed and was able to fool many into thinking he was an elite hockey player in this league?
I used to think his interviews where he kidded with John Giannone about his wardrobe were cute - the first dozen times - but if that is really - really! - all he brings to this team is a funny interview, I question why they need him on the ice.
And after he did that during a playoff interview, I seriously questioned - for the hundreth time this year - just where his head was at.
If I'm making the most money on an original six team and playing in the biggest US market for a team like the New York Rangers, I can't promise the world but I should be able to promise to have my head on straight.
Gomez, I'm afraid, has never proven to me that he is capable of being a professional and having his head in the right place. He's also never proven to me that he has realized that he isn't and that he doesn't. And I actually do not know which is worse.
#23
I am saving some words on Chris Drury for Part 2 of this already incredibly long Season in Review segment. So we'll just stick to the basics here.
The Rangers signed Chris Drury because he was "clutch." They signed Chris Drury because he had been labeled a "winner." He had won at every level - Little League baseball, collegiate hockey, the NHL.
Therefore he was a "must-get."
I feel worse for Drury than I do for Gomez, because I actually believe Chris Drury wanted to do well and is upset with himself that he hasn't.
BUT, none of that makes me feel sorry for him that he, too, is making $7.050 million per season and that he had done little and has done little to warrant it.
The history of being a winner only means so much. It only means something if you can bring something tangible with you.
Drury, at his best, was inconsistent this year.
Drury, at his worst, wasn't good enough.
That's not including his playoff run where he played, admirably, with a broken hand. That is an admirable thing and that showed that he cares more about the team than himself.
I actually would never argue that fact, that Drury cares more about the team than himself. I would however admit that, sadly enough, that hasn't mean very much.
Drury, like Gomez, would be amazing on faceoffs one game, and dreadful the next. I've never, in all my watching hockey seen such inconsistency as I saw with this year's team.
Now sure, some of that, perhaps, can be blamed on the coaches, the systems, or the lack thereof, but the bottom line is a player decides on a given night if he is going to come to play or not. Not whether he will play or how much he will play or in what way he will play, but if he is going to be ready to play.
Again, I'm not sure how much this was evident in Drury's performance. In his case, perhaps, it was not a matter of caring too little but caring too much. Either way, Drury seemed ill-committed at times. Nervous. Confused.
Not what you'd want or expect from a $7 million dollar a year player.
And point production? Surely he didn't have that. Making others around him better? I cannot with honesty say I am sure he did that either.
Sometimes it is not your fault. Sometimes you just aren't good enough to live up to all the good things people want to believe about you.
Perhaps Chris Drury is clutch and perhaps he is a winner. But it means two different things to win on a team playing a team game as part of a unit and to win on a team playing a team game when you have the responsibility of being one of the biggest parts of that unit.
I have yet to see that push and that desire from Drury when he has been in New York. He scored a few game tying goals last season, one to force an Edmonton game to overtime, specifically.
This year we saw a gutsy playoff goal from Drury in game 4, which turned out to be a game winner.
This was, perhaps, the most clutch moment he had since joining the Rangers.
It was perhaps his only truly clutch moment, with two years down and three to go on his contract.
I like Chris Drury just fine. But the problem with having a great past as a winner and a clutch performer is that if you don't continue to live up to it, you will always be deemed a failure in those places you did not succeed.
It's a shame, but it's simply the truth.
#6
When all is said and done, not Scott Gomez, not Chris Drury, but Wade Redden, will go down as having the worst contract in the history of the New York Rangers.
When I heard the news that the Rangers got Redden, my immediate reaction was to vomit over a theatre balcony. (True story)
I said Wade Redden was the last player I wanted on this team. The last, and that it killed me that he was not only on this team, but on this team for that money and for that many years.
Disgraceful.
To Redden's discredit, he did nothing to prove us nay-sayers wrong. He began the season with a bit of a snap and a goal in Prague and gave an interview where he said he was so "excited" to be playing with this team and excited to come back and play in New York.
He'd come back, indeed, and score another goal at opening night at the Garden against the Blackhawks.
Goodness hopes he had a long memory because it would be four and a half months, two head coaches, and 58 games later that he'd score again.
6.5 million for a guy that scored 3 goals all year. A guy that was, presumably, hired to be the powerplay quarterback, was a big part of the second to worst powerplay in the entire league.
His best year, numerically, was 2005-2006, where he scored 10 goals, 40 assists and was a plus 35. His best powerplay year, came in 2003-2004 when he scored 12 of his 17 goals with the man advantage.
Problem was, that his last two years in Ottawa produced paltry numbers compared to the three seasons prior. To any observer of even a handful of games in Ottawa, this was a guy that was not on the upside of anything, as I saw myself and well noted here.
And yet, he was given a contract to rival all contracts and to confound even the best of us.
You might expect me to rip into Redden here, let him have it for all he the miserable plays he made this season, for all his lack of effort and lack of goal production. But I'm not.
Instead I am going to give him a teeny-tinsy break, if only for a moment, to make a point.
Wade Redden was set up to fail in New York.
You heard me.
Wade Redden, under the best of circumstances, could never have succeeded here in New York.
For Wade Redden to be worth the contract he was given, he'd have to be in the same league as Brian Leetch, when it all comes down to it.
The Rangers have searched and discarded and pushed aside defensemen, but they have never closed their arms around anyone even half the player that Brian Leetch was.
For Brian Leetch was, in my opinion, the greatest player to play for the New York Rangers. There are things he could do that were so effortless and amazing that we all, each and every one of us, took them for granted. Took for granted that night in and night out, you'd have the most consistent, hard working, professional, and talented player play for your team.
In the years Leetch was here and in the years he's been gone, no one has even come close.
Wade Redden, in his best years, wasn't half the player Brian Leetch was.
And I mean what I am going to say next with no personal disrespect to Wade Redden, the person, but he is not even fit to sharpen Brian Leetch's skates.
That's how far off the reservation of elite NHL defensemen Wade Redden is.
And yet, he is making money comparable to what the Rangers would pay an elite defenseman of Brian's stature.
(Sure, yes, agreed, Brian Leetch would deserve much, much more, in reality, but bear with me here.)
And that - not his lack of skill, not his lack of poise, not his lack of guts -, that is why Wade Redden was doomed to fail here.
Because he is not even worth half that much, or a third of that much. And yet by giving that money to him, we all expect just too much from a man that has, sadly, nothing really left to give.
And now, the niceness stops.
Forget the dismal powerplay and Redden's horrific hesitancy to shoot the puck for the moment. Wade Redden did nothing, nothing!, to endear himself to this group.
He took the paycheck, but he didn't pay the price. He wasn't playing like a Ranger!, he was acting like a fraud.
Forget the numbers. Look no further than these two instances. On January 3rd, Redden got annoyed with Capitals captain Chris Clark, and he knocked him out, with a single punch.
Great, you say. Why bring this up? I bring this up because this still, to me, remains the only example in an entire 82-game season that I have of Wade Redden showing he had a pulse.
The second instance was on February 28th, in the great Avalanche/Rangers goal-fest. In an-already decided game, Colorado took to being nasty, and Dubinsky got involved with a player (Laperierre?) along the corner boards. Every other player went to his defense, and tied up someone.
Redden, in the ultimate moment of team unity, showed team indifference in refusing to drop his gloves so that he could gain an adequate hold on the Avalanche player. Instead he watched as Dubinsky was beaten not by one, but by two Colorado players.
Want to talk about being a good teammate? How about a decent human being? I've never seen a player so hesitant to get his hands dirty.
So no, Wade. It's not your lack of scoring, or your lack of powerplay precense that disappointed me. Remember, I - unlike Glennie Boy - knew in advance of July 1st that I didn't want you for $1 million, let alone $6.5 million, because you were just not good enough.
But it's your lack of pride, lack of support, and lack of anything resembling team unity that disgusted me more in the end.
Why? You can't help that you are a crappy player getting paid the money of a superstar in this league. But you can help your attitude and your committment to the game. I saw neither. And that is where I stop defending you.
Sure, you came back and found some of your game in the playoffs, and weren't a complete disaster there. But, seriously, the majority of the 82 games leading up to it were no-shows. We can't in all ethical honesty applaud a guy for showing up when the spotlight was on, when for every game that the fans and teammates wanted and needed more from him, he came up empty.
In closing Part One of this Season in Review, I feel I must state the obvious. None of these players alone is responsible for the disaster that this Rangers season was. None of these players is soley to blame or to chastise for that fact.
BUT, these three players have to shoulder the brunt of it.
Why?
Because of their salaries, other players - other necessary players that perhaps could actually do the jobs better - could not be obtained. Because of their salaries this team is handicapped and these players are, barring insanely tricky measures, untradable.
Is that their fault? No, perhaps not. Ultimately, of course, blame falls back to the Great Concoctor, Glen Sather.
But I, as a fan, would like to think that even if I were not that good, or even if the situation wasn't perfect, that I'd at least show up to every game, play with a sense of urgency, a sense of pride, and a sense of self-worth, that I'd play the best that I could every single night out, knowing, in the end, that was all I could do.
And I am quite sure that none of these three players did that on a regular basis, did the one thing they could control most.
So instead we can sum it all up with these words:
Saddled with similar $7 million dollar salaries from Free Agent Folly Day 2007, Scott Gomez and Chris Drury became married to this team and inevitably connected to its money woes. That is a fact that will remain true until they are no longer a part of this team, and will forever remain true in the memory of the years they spent here.
Wade Redden will have one distinction in his time in New York and it will have nothing to do with his talent or his lack thereof. It will be that he was, undoubtably the biggest most inexcusable folly in a long, long list of big and inexcusable follies.
**Many apologies for the length of this blog, but come on, let's face it: if you are coming here to read this site, you are not reading for quick hits and light reading, you come here to read the always rambling, sometimes scattered thoughts of a wordy individual.
Stay tuned in the coming week for a few more parts of the Season in Review.**
Sunday, February 1, 2009
To Boston and Back. . .
I didn't post yesterday about the Boston/Rangers game because I was too tired and wanted to get back upstairs and watch the late night HNIC game. So I will now.
I actually drove to Boston yesterday for the game, a trip planned in September when tickets went on sale. After recent uninspiring games from the Rangers, I almost didn't want to go. Horrible, I know, but please remember, I sat through the 3-0 sleeper in Pittsburgh two weeks ago. But I'd never been to TDBanknorth Garden for a hockey game, so I went.
And unlike the game in Pittsburgh where alcohol was not consumed, I aimed to better prepare myself for what I thought might be an offensive onslaught by the Bruins. The plan seemed to work, I must admit.
First of all though, the arena, while not new to me, still impresses. It's clean, well set up, and everything is so bright. As a person used to the Garden, which I do love for reasons besides it's not being clean, well-set up, or bright, any of these newer arenas take on a different feeling than what I am used to.
Also, big kudos to whoever does in game presentation for the arena. I watched the pre-game video montage and clip show on their Garden screen - which might be the biggest and clearest I've ever seen - and I was so pumped up to watch the game - for the Bruins!
Which on some level, isn't surprising. They after all, have a team that is very good, and just seems to do everything right this season. Score a lot of goals, play a solid team defense, and have two - oopps sorry, three - goalies that can impress on a nightly basis. It's rare and it is exciting to see. (Hell, I'm not Montreal, I'm allowed to admit the Bruins style is highly entertaining.)
As for the game, you have to forgive me. Considering I assumed this was going to be a huge tilt in favor of the Bruins, I was happily surprised with the 1-0 score. (Without looking at anything else at all). Mind you, this was only because of the Rangers recent play. Any other year, I would have expected a 1-0 game from the Rangers/Bruins in Boston on a Saturday afternoon because that is all I remember seeing for the majority of the last few years. Which, again, as a fan that does not necessarily like low scoring games would usually disappoint, but a 0-0 game between two goaltenders that gets inevitably decided by overtime or shootout is nice once in a while.
I had assumed (forgetting about the Montreal/Boston tilt this afternoon) that Thomas would start and it would be a duel of the East All-Star matchups. Instead Tuukka Rask came in and played, like any other Boston goalie 90% of the time, well enough to win, and well enough to get the shutout. Which I found out was his first career on the way out of the arena.
Not that the Rangers truly offered very much in the way of resistance, but I thought both goalies did well. And again, I was, and I mean it, very satisfied to have walked out of that arena with the game being 1-0. Win or lose.
Does that make me a horrible fan? I think it just makes me realistic at this point.
Speaking of horrible though (bad transition, I admit), I shook my head only a few times during the game. One, was after the Rangers eighth too many men on the ice penalty. Eighth.
These Rangers really seem to be aiming for the you-don't-want-to-be-known-for-this record books this season, eh?
No excuse. And according to one Larry Brooks, no accountability for Chris Drury who jumped on the ice.
Are the Rangers really so bad a team that this has happened not once or twice, but eight times in 50 or so games? I tell you what, it's not the mark of a good team.
That play negated what would have been their only powerplay of the game. Although, knowing how the powerplay unit probably would have looked if given more of a chance, maybe it was a blessing in disguise.
Blech. I know.
Today's reflections were much of the same. I didn't think anyone played spectacularly well on the Rangers yesterday afternoon. But considering how low my bar was set, I wasn't complaining.
Brooks, in my usual Sunday morning read, however, saw it a little differently. He said a 1-0 game might seem great, because it was against the best team in the league (I believe by winning in regulation Boston jumped over the Sharks for the time being but remained #1 when the Sharks lost to the Blackhawks late last night).
http://www.nypost.com/seven/02012009/sports/rangers/blueshirts_held_scoreless_in_boston_153062.htm
But, he highlighted things that I was unaware of because, well, watching a game in the stands, with a slight buzz and no stat sheets to consult, makes it difficult to keep track of simple things like the lines.
Oh, but wait, according to Brooks Renney utilized 14 line combos in the 3rd period. Even if I hadn't been drinking, I wouldn't have been able to keep track of that!
He also makes mention to something that, I won't lie, I was thinking to myself the other day at the (other) Garden.
"Has anyone noticed, by the way, that Drury was a much more effective player with Petr (The Scratch) Prucha on his wing?"
Yes, Larry, indeed I have. As I admit I thought Drury would drag Prucha down when after two games on the wing with Dubinsky and Zherdev, Prucha was moved to a line with Dawes and Drury, back early last month, I didn't think for a moment that Prucha would actually help Drury be better.
Apparently that just might have been the case. He has not looked as good, minus Chicago's outburst, since Prucha’s dismissal from the lineup.
Brooks' other points:
Dawes' silly play that led to Boston's (and the game's) only goal.
And super Redden, highly touted quarterback of the powerplay, which as we well know is anything but competitive and effective, on the ice late in the game when the Rangers were pushing to tie.
". . .by a team as impotent as the Rangers, who, for some unknown reason, had Wade Redden at the right point for an offensive zone draw with 48.4 seconds to go in the match after pulling Henrik Lundqvist.
But then, Redden does have two assists in his last 20 games, doesn't he?"
I'd laugh, but I'm still crying over the fact that there's still five more years of this.
Honestly, I do not know. I'm still holding to the bottom line with the score on this one, but again, I've been the person for most of the year, even during the great start to the season this team had, saying things were not fundamentally right with this team and that their basic flaws - bad powerplay, lack of goal scoring, lack of anything resembling cohesiveness on the ice - would haunt them all year.
So just so there is no mistake, I am not one of those that still finds themselves in the categories of surprise or denial.
P.S. I have been to a lot of hockey games, and not just at MSG. I saw more random NHL jerseys yesterday in Boston than I think I have ever in my hockey journeys. There was an Avalanche, a Red Wings, a Senators Spezza, and even a Quebec Nordiques jersey. My personal favorite though. I saw a woman in the restroom wearing a Kings Ziggy Palffy jersey.
Oh and in case you’re curious, someone did once buy a Kevin Weekes Rangers sweater, and apparently still wears it.
I actually drove to Boston yesterday for the game, a trip planned in September when tickets went on sale. After recent uninspiring games from the Rangers, I almost didn't want to go. Horrible, I know, but please remember, I sat through the 3-0 sleeper in Pittsburgh two weeks ago. But I'd never been to TDBanknorth Garden for a hockey game, so I went.
And unlike the game in Pittsburgh where alcohol was not consumed, I aimed to better prepare myself for what I thought might be an offensive onslaught by the Bruins. The plan seemed to work, I must admit.
First of all though, the arena, while not new to me, still impresses. It's clean, well set up, and everything is so bright. As a person used to the Garden, which I do love for reasons besides it's not being clean, well-set up, or bright, any of these newer arenas take on a different feeling than what I am used to.
Also, big kudos to whoever does in game presentation for the arena. I watched the pre-game video montage and clip show on their Garden screen - which might be the biggest and clearest I've ever seen - and I was so pumped up to watch the game - for the Bruins!
Which on some level, isn't surprising. They after all, have a team that is very good, and just seems to do everything right this season. Score a lot of goals, play a solid team defense, and have two - oopps sorry, three - goalies that can impress on a nightly basis. It's rare and it is exciting to see. (Hell, I'm not Montreal, I'm allowed to admit the Bruins style is highly entertaining.)
As for the game, you have to forgive me. Considering I assumed this was going to be a huge tilt in favor of the Bruins, I was happily surprised with the 1-0 score. (Without looking at anything else at all). Mind you, this was only because of the Rangers recent play. Any other year, I would have expected a 1-0 game from the Rangers/Bruins in Boston on a Saturday afternoon because that is all I remember seeing for the majority of the last few years. Which, again, as a fan that does not necessarily like low scoring games would usually disappoint, but a 0-0 game between two goaltenders that gets inevitably decided by overtime or shootout is nice once in a while.
I had assumed (forgetting about the Montreal/Boston tilt this afternoon) that Thomas would start and it would be a duel of the East All-Star matchups. Instead Tuukka Rask came in and played, like any other Boston goalie 90% of the time, well enough to win, and well enough to get the shutout. Which I found out was his first career on the way out of the arena.
Not that the Rangers truly offered very much in the way of resistance, but I thought both goalies did well. And again, I was, and I mean it, very satisfied to have walked out of that arena with the game being 1-0. Win or lose.
Does that make me a horrible fan? I think it just makes me realistic at this point.
Speaking of horrible though (bad transition, I admit), I shook my head only a few times during the game. One, was after the Rangers eighth too many men on the ice penalty. Eighth.
These Rangers really seem to be aiming for the you-don't-want-to-be-known-for-this record books this season, eh?
No excuse. And according to one Larry Brooks, no accountability for Chris Drury who jumped on the ice.
Are the Rangers really so bad a team that this has happened not once or twice, but eight times in 50 or so games? I tell you what, it's not the mark of a good team.
That play negated what would have been their only powerplay of the game. Although, knowing how the powerplay unit probably would have looked if given more of a chance, maybe it was a blessing in disguise.
Blech. I know.
Today's reflections were much of the same. I didn't think anyone played spectacularly well on the Rangers yesterday afternoon. But considering how low my bar was set, I wasn't complaining.
Brooks, in my usual Sunday morning read, however, saw it a little differently. He said a 1-0 game might seem great, because it was against the best team in the league (I believe by winning in regulation Boston jumped over the Sharks for the time being but remained #1 when the Sharks lost to the Blackhawks late last night).
http://www.nypost.com/seven/02012009/sports/rangers/blueshirts_held_scoreless_in_boston_153062.htm
But, he highlighted things that I was unaware of because, well, watching a game in the stands, with a slight buzz and no stat sheets to consult, makes it difficult to keep track of simple things like the lines.
Oh, but wait, according to Brooks Renney utilized 14 line combos in the 3rd period. Even if I hadn't been drinking, I wouldn't have been able to keep track of that!
He also makes mention to something that, I won't lie, I was thinking to myself the other day at the (other) Garden.
"Has anyone noticed, by the way, that Drury was a much more effective player with Petr (The Scratch) Prucha on his wing?"
Yes, Larry, indeed I have. As I admit I thought Drury would drag Prucha down when after two games on the wing with Dubinsky and Zherdev, Prucha was moved to a line with Dawes and Drury, back early last month, I didn't think for a moment that Prucha would actually help Drury be better.
Apparently that just might have been the case. He has not looked as good, minus Chicago's outburst, since Prucha’s dismissal from the lineup.
Brooks' other points:
Dawes' silly play that led to Boston's (and the game's) only goal.
And super Redden, highly touted quarterback of the powerplay, which as we well know is anything but competitive and effective, on the ice late in the game when the Rangers were pushing to tie.
". . .by a team as impotent as the Rangers, who, for some unknown reason, had Wade Redden at the right point for an offensive zone draw with 48.4 seconds to go in the match after pulling Henrik Lundqvist.
But then, Redden does have two assists in his last 20 games, doesn't he?"
I'd laugh, but I'm still crying over the fact that there's still five more years of this.
Honestly, I do not know. I'm still holding to the bottom line with the score on this one, but again, I've been the person for most of the year, even during the great start to the season this team had, saying things were not fundamentally right with this team and that their basic flaws - bad powerplay, lack of goal scoring, lack of anything resembling cohesiveness on the ice - would haunt them all year.
So just so there is no mistake, I am not one of those that still finds themselves in the categories of surprise or denial.
P.S. I have been to a lot of hockey games, and not just at MSG. I saw more random NHL jerseys yesterday in Boston than I think I have ever in my hockey journeys. There was an Avalanche, a Red Wings, a Senators Spezza, and even a Quebec Nordiques jersey. My personal favorite though. I saw a woman in the restroom wearing a Kings Ziggy Palffy jersey.
Oh and in case you’re curious, someone did once buy a Kevin Weekes Rangers sweater, and apparently still wears it.
Saturday, January 3, 2009
The Great AO, Halfway to a Record, and The Funniest Fight I May Have Ever Seen. . .
Well - that game had almost everything.
Almost.
I must say though, I was highly entertained. Annoyed at points, but highly entertained.
The Most Entertaining Moments:
Marc Staal is the man. While I have never been a fan of knock-em down defenseman, Staal has found a way to do it in a way I enjoy. Perhaps because it appears effortless. While he's a tall guy, he's not overly big (196 lbs?) but he hits like he is. And his battles with Ovechkin make me wish these teams played more than four times. Great stuff.
AO. I've been saying it and it's nice to hear the even-if-we-are-getting-more-and-more-nauseating-with-every-game tandem of Joe and Sam say so. He is amazing. That character and that ability. Forget it. There really aren't words for how exciting he can be. A rare thing. I'm envious of Capitals fans getting to see that night in and night out. No wonder they pack the building. The team is great - (with only one loss and one overtime loss at home all year and their best start in 40 years!) but that is the man they are coming to see. No question.
Wade Redden actually stepping up and, well stepping up period. I almost thought I'd fallen asleep and woken up in dreamland. That's the most energy I've seen from him yet. I hope that won't be the last. Show you have a pulse, Wade, damn it. They are paying you enough! Too bad none of that seemed to help their defense.
Petr Prucha getting another chance and another goal. Hmmm. Wonders do never cease to amaze me. It wasn't even Dubinsky and Zherdev, in my opinion, that were having great games. Prucha was just skating with a power all his own, a man possessed. It was great to see and it paid off for him. Now, he scored. Again. He was one of the best players. Again. What else can you ask for from the kid?
Fight of the Year:
No, no, not Orr/Cote, not Orr/Boulton, but Staal and Semin. I have not laughed that hard in a long, long time. And it's just laughter. I mean Semin will never live that down, but he's a great enough player people will probably forgive him for it. But what was going through his head?? haha. I love Staal just ripping the jersey off with no effort. And what can Semin do but slap him like a child who had a toy taken away. I love Semin. I do. But that was the funniest fight I think I have ever seen. Ever.
The Not-So-Entertaining:
Gomez, while speedy, had another one of those games were the speed appears to generate nothing, in the end.
Was it me, or did Drury spend a lot of this game on his butt? It seemed so.
And yet, those are the guys that are out there with the game on the line. The same stagnant group of players that have made the Rangers powerplay. . . a disgrace.
Why not next time the game is on the line, stick Staal back along the line by the defensive zone to block the empty net. Stick Callahan and Dubinsky and Mara in the offensive zone to hit and tie up every other player, much like the PK that seems to work so well. Put Z out there to put the puck on net. And stick Prucha in front of the net.
Tell me even my lay-man's idea doesn't make more sense than what Renney did?
More Than Halfway to a Record:I'd really love to hear the post-game comments on this one. If it hadn't happened 11 times already this year, you might be able to say, bad bounce, and it's Alex freakin' Ovechkin. But, guess what, it's not the first time. And credit AO all you want - you know I will! But the Rangers powerplay is so bad. It's so bad, there are no words. It's so bad they should have been denying it for years now. In fact, it's so bad, they should literally skate the puck back to their OWN zone on the PP, give the puck intentionally to the other team, and play it like a penalty kill.
Because any other way, they are just asking to be scored upon.
12 goals with just over half a season to go. They can hit 22 easy to tie and make 23 goals to set the all-time record for shorties allowed. I am confident they can.
And yet, do they really seem to care? After THREE years of a bad powerplay? And this third year where it has somehow, beyond anyone's comprehension, gotten WORSE?
That's It and That's All:
Really, despite a few decisions I'd correct - like pp personnel and the coaching staff in general - I thought the game was entertaining. I really did. Credit guys like Staal, Prucha, Callahan, Dawes, and even Redden for that tonight. (For the record, even though Joe/Sam overdo it a lot, Dawes has looked remarkably better in the last five. No doubt). And big props to Valliquette. He played very well on the fly and was not in any way the reason this team could not pull out a win.
And AO is AO, so that's entertainment right there.
I just wonder what happens next?
Does this team's big name, big priced players actually, well, learn to play?
When do they stop referring to whatever line Gomez is on as the #1/Top Line?
When do they take my ideas for the PP or give up entirely?
And lastly, if Prucha scores a goal - the only Rangers goal -, and they still lose, does he play again?
Tough ones, folks. Tough ones.
I'm upstairs to watch some World Juniors before the late evening Oilers/Stars tilt. Should be good. Enjoy all.
Almost.
I must say though, I was highly entertained. Annoyed at points, but highly entertained.
The Most Entertaining Moments:
Marc Staal is the man. While I have never been a fan of knock-em down defenseman, Staal has found a way to do it in a way I enjoy. Perhaps because it appears effortless. While he's a tall guy, he's not overly big (196 lbs?) but he hits like he is. And his battles with Ovechkin make me wish these teams played more than four times. Great stuff.
AO. I've been saying it and it's nice to hear the even-if-we-are-getting-more-and-more-nauseating-with-every-game tandem of Joe and Sam say so. He is amazing. That character and that ability. Forget it. There really aren't words for how exciting he can be. A rare thing. I'm envious of Capitals fans getting to see that night in and night out. No wonder they pack the building. The team is great - (with only one loss and one overtime loss at home all year and their best start in 40 years!) but that is the man they are coming to see. No question.
Wade Redden actually stepping up and, well stepping up period. I almost thought I'd fallen asleep and woken up in dreamland. That's the most energy I've seen from him yet. I hope that won't be the last. Show you have a pulse, Wade, damn it. They are paying you enough! Too bad none of that seemed to help their defense.
Petr Prucha getting another chance and another goal. Hmmm. Wonders do never cease to amaze me. It wasn't even Dubinsky and Zherdev, in my opinion, that were having great games. Prucha was just skating with a power all his own, a man possessed. It was great to see and it paid off for him. Now, he scored. Again. He was one of the best players. Again. What else can you ask for from the kid?
Fight of the Year:
No, no, not Orr/Cote, not Orr/Boulton, but Staal and Semin. I have not laughed that hard in a long, long time. And it's just laughter. I mean Semin will never live that down, but he's a great enough player people will probably forgive him for it. But what was going through his head?? haha. I love Staal just ripping the jersey off with no effort. And what can Semin do but slap him like a child who had a toy taken away. I love Semin. I do. But that was the funniest fight I think I have ever seen. Ever.
The Not-So-Entertaining:
Gomez, while speedy, had another one of those games were the speed appears to generate nothing, in the end.
Was it me, or did Drury spend a lot of this game on his butt? It seemed so.
And yet, those are the guys that are out there with the game on the line. The same stagnant group of players that have made the Rangers powerplay. . . a disgrace.
Why not next time the game is on the line, stick Staal back along the line by the defensive zone to block the empty net. Stick Callahan and Dubinsky and Mara in the offensive zone to hit and tie up every other player, much like the PK that seems to work so well. Put Z out there to put the puck on net. And stick Prucha in front of the net.
Tell me even my lay-man's idea doesn't make more sense than what Renney did?
More Than Halfway to a Record:I'd really love to hear the post-game comments on this one. If it hadn't happened 11 times already this year, you might be able to say, bad bounce, and it's Alex freakin' Ovechkin. But, guess what, it's not the first time. And credit AO all you want - you know I will! But the Rangers powerplay is so bad. It's so bad, there are no words. It's so bad they should have been denying it for years now. In fact, it's so bad, they should literally skate the puck back to their OWN zone on the PP, give the puck intentionally to the other team, and play it like a penalty kill.
Because any other way, they are just asking to be scored upon.
12 goals with just over half a season to go. They can hit 22 easy to tie and make 23 goals to set the all-time record for shorties allowed. I am confident they can.
And yet, do they really seem to care? After THREE years of a bad powerplay? And this third year where it has somehow, beyond anyone's comprehension, gotten WORSE?
That's It and That's All:
Really, despite a few decisions I'd correct - like pp personnel and the coaching staff in general - I thought the game was entertaining. I really did. Credit guys like Staal, Prucha, Callahan, Dawes, and even Redden for that tonight. (For the record, even though Joe/Sam overdo it a lot, Dawes has looked remarkably better in the last five. No doubt). And big props to Valliquette. He played very well on the fly and was not in any way the reason this team could not pull out a win.
And AO is AO, so that's entertainment right there.
I just wonder what happens next?
Does this team's big name, big priced players actually, well, learn to play?
When do they stop referring to whatever line Gomez is on as the #1/Top Line?
When do they take my ideas for the PP or give up entirely?
And lastly, if Prucha scores a goal - the only Rangers goal -, and they still lose, does he play again?
Tough ones, folks. Tough ones.
I'm upstairs to watch some World Juniors before the late evening Oilers/Stars tilt. Should be good. Enjoy all.
Monday, November 24, 2008
Some More Thoughts Before the Rangers Play the Coyotes Tonight. . .
To those of you who are finally realizing the Rangers organization totally, utterly, and completely handicapped themselves for the better part of the next decade by signing 5 guys to contracts that when grouped together equal more than half of their total team allotment and that only one of them - ONE - is worth it. . . let me just say: Welcome to reality. Seriously. Put your feet up, grab a beer, and get comfy for the ride. Unless a lot of "what ifs" or "well maybes" or "lighting in beer bottles" happen...this team is going nowhere fast.
And no, this not a rant from a person that is sore their team has dropped two in a row. This is a person who is shocked they were able to win AT ALL so far this season with their messy mish-mosh of expensive parts that don't fill well together. Seriously. This is a team of players some of which I find it hard to even like at certain moments. Gone are the days of me looking at the team and saying, gee, they might have lost, but damn they put in a strong effort. Seriously. Has any one game been a true team, a true 60 minute effort? Anyone? The closest, perhaps, came against NJ, in one of the Rangers games against them. But that still probably wasn't a 60 minute complete effort. So I'm going to go with no. No.
And has any player for the entire season thus far played with heart and determination night in and night out? One. Lundqvist. You might be able to make a case for Callahan, and the truth is, that kid does show up every single night. The only thing he is not doing that Hank is, is living up to his full capacity. He's not. But on a team that can't score at all, I can't fault a guy for hustling, hitting, and getting a PP goal or two, when he's actually given the time to do so. Alright. So we have Hank. Callahan. And I'll add Marc Staal to that as well. Kid has had maybe one bad game. Kid came to play this year. Thank goodness for him. But if I were him, I'd want to be out of town really quick.
This team - and I did the math on this already so feel free to go back to July 31st "Does It Really All Add Up Rangers Fans" and play catchup - is fundamentally flawed. They have too many potential scorers and too few potential set up men. They have small guys that try to hit and big guys that won't hit. They have a serious lack of defensive defensemen. They have absolutely no physical precense. They can't skate, or if they can, they apparently won't. They take a lot of penalties. And they can't generate much, if any, offense on the powerplays they receive. Fundamentally screwed.
The only thing this team has truly seemed to master is the penalty kill. And yes, credit them all for that. But stopping goals against will only do so much if they are invisible 5-5 and ineffective 5-4. You have to score to win. I haven't seen a game yet where you can do it any other way.
Want to get a quick update on how those "big name/big numbers" players are doing for the Rangers thus far this season? Sure. Let's go.
Rozsival ($5 for 4 years)
23 games, 2 goals, 7 assists, 9 points, -9 (PP: 2G, 4A)
Redden ($6.5 for 6 years)
23 games, 2 goals, 8 assists, 10 points, 0 (PP: 1G 4A)
Drury ($7.05 for 5 years)
23 games, 8 goals, 5 assists, 13 points, -5 (PP: 4G, 3A)
Gomez ($7.357 for 7 years)
18 games, 3 goals, 10 assists, 13 points, -4 (PP: 0G, 5A)
Lundqvist ($6.875 for __ years)
19 games, 12 wins, 5 losses, 2 OTL, .923 Sav%, 2.15GAA
How many of those guys do you think are earning their money? Again, one. Hank.
The Rangers two best defensemen this year have been Paul Mara ($1.95) and Marc Staal ($0.827) - also two of their least expensive. Their best offensive defenseman is Dan Girardi ($1.55). Those are the only defensemen that are in the plus in the plus/minus category. Dmitri Kalinin is -10, Rozsival is -9. Yikes!
The Rangers best offensvie players, period, are
Nik Zherdev ($2.5)
23 games, 7 goals, 10 assists, 17 points, +7 (PP: 2G, 2A)
Markus Naslund ($4 for 2 years)
23 games, 7 goals, 9 assists, 16 points, -2 (PP: 2G 3A)
Dan Girardi ($1.55)
23 games, 2 goals, 12 assists, 14 points, +1 (PP: 0G, 5A)
Brandon Dubinsky ($0.633)
23 games, 4 goals, 10 assists, 14 points, 0 (PP: 2G, 3A)
What did they pay Gomez and Drury for? No, I know. Gomez was payed $7 for 7 because Sather likes the #7? And Drury was paid $7 for 5 because Sather knew he liked the team and would be...umm, loyal?
Different month, same argument. This team is not going to sustain itself on mediocrity. They proved that against Vancouver and in Ottawa this weekend. They were flat. And there is not one person on this team that can pull them out of it. Nor should there be one person. {which is why I don't buy the Gomez is playing tonight and he'll fix the team argument]. This should be a team effort. BUT....when the team is handicapped by what I would bet are pretty untradeable salaries for many years to come, how do they make a move to try to make it better? If you were a competing GM, would you want Redden, Roszival, Drury, or Gomez in return? I don't think I would!.
And Larry Brooks again reminds us of the salary just being wasted at this point. Poor Petr Prucha's $1.6 and Patrick Rissmiller's $1.0
http://www.nypost.com/seven/11242008/sports/rangers/rangers_need_new_look_140507.htm
It's disgusting that nothing is being done with Prucha and that a 26-year-old kid with potential is being allowed to rot in the locker room. It really is disgusting. And as for Rissmiller. That was Sather's mistake in the first place. But the guy was down in Hartford for six games on conditioning and scored 7 points. Think these are bad players? Or players that have not at all been given a TRUE and honest chance to succeed in this environment? Call me crazy, but I'm sure if Prucha went down on a conditioning assignment, he'd score some points too.
As per Sam Weinman (http://rangers.lohudblogs.com/2008/11/24/gomez-to-play-tonight-against-coyotes/): "As for Prucha, Renney acknowledged that the player’s extended absence from the lineup has been a concern."
Well that's refreshing. I mean at least he knows he exists.
And yes, true, these are presumably all Glen Sather's mistakes, and the poeple calling for Tom Renney's head recently, are after the wrong guy. [History would prove there is little that any Rangers coach can do without being subject to Sather's wills and wims. Walkie talkies to the coach on the bench, anyone?] Maybe there is nothing Renney can do. But I am still not sure he is handling it the right way. Benching Dubinsky and Zherdev and Voros, but not benching the guys who actually are paid to be the teams best players? Unless he has no choice. And if that's the case, I have a plan. It'll never, ever happen, but oh how I'd love to see it.
Get Slats behind the bench again. Remove Renney, temporarily, permanently, whatever, and have Slats manage the mess he's created. Brilliant, no? It'll either come together perfectly in his the way the visionary designed it to, or it'll come crashing down to Earth. Either way, we'll know the answer. Whether this team, as is, can ever truly be a team. A hardworking, consistent, result-producing team. Or whether the Rangers are going to just be bad. Bad, ineffective, uninspiring, and boring. I mean at least we'd know.
Who's with me?
Monday, November 17, 2008
The Rangers Bonnie and Clyde It Again. . .
This time from a very good Boston team. For the most part, it was a rather lackluster game to start. Not bad, by any means. But slow. And especially after all the hype surrounding it. Saturday night, two best teams in the East, from the World's Most Famous.
The Rangers led in shots 5-0 to open the game and when Boston woke up in the 2nd half, they quickly tied up. Again, a very back and forth game. The difference? Boston came on in the 2nd to score 2 goals, taking the life out of the Garden and out of the Rangers team.
And then the thiefs came in and stole some points - again.
Late in the 3rd.
Again.
First at 13:55, Nigel Dawes struck. And then at 19:07, Naslund pulled it even for the tie. I was, for one, shocked.
As a Rangers fan I can't help but be happy that they did pull it off. Of course I am. But there has got to be some major concerns about a team that if now becoming accustomed to playing catch up, come from behind hockey. The Rangers of this year actually have a better record when they give up the first goal. Rather than get it themselves. Something backwards there.
That being said, it is character that helps teams to win games like they did Saturday night. And credit them for that. I'm just wondering what happens when they fall more than 2 goals behind or they run into a team they can't push aside.
Some random thoughts. The line of Dan Fritsche, Nigel Dawes, and Lauri Korpikoski looked strong again. So strong, in fact, that they were utilized extensively in the 3rd and for all over 1:30 min on the powerplay. Take that as you will. I'm not judging. But credit them.
However, Scott Gomez, who looks to be unavailable for tonight's game because of his ankle situation, well, when he comes back, who else but Dan Fritsche leaves? Can't pull Dawes, because, well he's Dawes. And you can't pull Korpikoski unless you are going to send him back down to Hartford. So that leaves #49. And it actually is a shame. I think Saturday (and Thursday as well) showcased the type of player the Rangers got. He can play stronger on the puck than the Rangers smaller guys. And as everyone was ooo-ing and ahh-ing Korpi's pass to set up Dawes for the first Rangers goal, it was Fritsche who carried the puck all the way in the zone and behind Thomas' net. I've seen too little of that this year. End to end. By one guy. Without loosing the puck. It'll be a shame when that goes away.
More a shame really considering the way Korpikoski and Fritsche fight along the boards and pass the puck, they seem to be working in great tandem. More so even than Dawes.
But you're not going to not bring Scott Gomez to the lineup in favor of Dan Fritsche. So it goes in NY.
I made a few notes, but I'm going to ignore them since two days have passed. Nothing was as important as the two points in the end, it seems.
Of note though, is Tom Renney's defense of Michal Rozsival, which I agree with to an extent. He's trying to convince a group of unconvincible fans, who have been booing him mercilisly, to not do so. Because he's here. And he'd like to see the fans do what Rozsival can do. And I agree there. Too many that boo have no idea how hard playing NHL hockey is.
My problem with the booing, is that it's counter productive. Booing him BEFORE he even has a chance to screw up, is messing with his head. And it's not fair. Not fair when it was Petr Nedved, not fair when it was Tom Poti, not fair when it was Marek Malik, and now not fair when it is his countryman, Rozsival. It will do nothing to boo him, except make his confidence take an even further nosedive. And although slightly rejuvinated, thanks to some other guys getting a chance on it, is the Rangers absysmal powerplay, really something you wnat to see nosedive further?
Rozsival is not worth his $5 a year. True. But he wanted to stay, they gave him the contract. End of story. Unless my short-sided and ill conceived theory is true (see next blog entry), they wanted Rozsival on this team.
Now, I'm not sure if I were Renney that I'd keep putting him out on the PP, but that's just me.
So tonight in come the Ottawa Senators, who managed to lose not once, but twice to the Islanders. Yes, those Islanders. Word on the XM radio circuit is Jason Spezza could be headed out of town in a blockbuster trade, perhaps with Edmonton.
I've said for years, I don't bet against a team that has Spezza, Dany Heatley, and Daniel Alfredsson. But I've also said that when that line does not produce, they have little else to compensate and it gets ugly quick. It's geting ugly folks. And I didn't pick Ottawa to make the playoffs. So I'm not entirely surprised with their start. But I have to believe there was more than just Ray Emery going on in that lockerroom. Perhaps a chance of scenery for Spezza will help re-focus the team. We'll see.
Of course, Larry Brooks in the NY Post today, proposed that maybe the Sens, to get a defenseman, would trade Vermette or Neil. And the Rangers can ship Prucha, presumably Rozsival, to Ottawa for one of them. If I'm the Rangers, I'm not sure I'd need Neil when I have Orr. But they'd shed salary, that's for sure. And for the sake of Prucha, I hope the kid would have a renaissance in the other nation's capital. I really would. Of course, this is all massive speculation.
Please see next blog for more thoughts on this.
In other Larry news, in Sunday's paper he asked:
"Finally, from Page Six. Which marquee player who is all about the team in the newspapers has been bringing his wife on road trips without the knowledge of his coach or GM?"
Now, at first I was torn, but I'm pretty sure I figured it out. Players that are marquee (in salary or in well actual marqueness): Hank, Drury, Gomez, Redden, Naslund. Cross out Hank and Gomez because they aren't married. Now cross of Drury and Naslund because presumably their wives would be home with their young children. Mystery solved. It's one Wade Redden.
Sure newlyweds can't keep their hands off each other, but is there more to this than meets the eye? hmmm.
Brook's 11/17/08
http://www.nypost.com/seven/11172008/sports/rangers/redden_vs__sens_promises_drama_139066.htm
Thursday, July 31, 2008
Does it really all add up, Rangers Fans. . .?
It’s been a week. Okay, it’s been more than a week. So why not throw a few random thoughts out there? Get me, umm you, through a lazy Thursday morning where I, err I mean you, can’t seem to get motivated. Great. Here we go. . .
In the last “more than a week” there’s been a lot of talk on XM204 about moves teams made, moves teams didn’t make, good, bad, or indifferent. Now, I remember listening to The Power Play on last Tuesday I believe, and they were having a conversation about the New York Rangers. *sigh* As a Rangers fan, it didn’t sound good. But, as a Rangers fan, I can’t say that I disagree with much they said. The hosts said that they didn’t know what to think of the Rangers. They didn’t see much sense with the Wade Redden deal (see below). And overall they were not sure WHY this team seriously overspent for so many players last year and again this year, which inevitably only serves to tie up A LOT of cap money. Because honestly it’s not an issue of will this team mesh, will the plan (or lack thereof) work? And goodness knows that I am hoping with all my heart that Marcus Naslund wakes up and thinks it is 2002, that whoever the heck is on the point on the power play actually shoots the puck (at the net!), that the young guys get a chance to play, that Hank Lundqvist gets his consistency going early and often, and that either (and hopefully both) Chris Drury and Scott Gomez make Rangers fans say, yes, damn, now that’s why we got that guy. But rather, it’s merely an issue of basic mathematics.
And before I continue, I must say that even though I’m better than average at math, I am not the type of fan who sits there calculating the room their team is under the cap (or over the cap) and how many (and which) players would have to be moved to make adequate cap space for [fill in the blank]. I can’t. Seriously, it seems like too much work for me that might not yield much satisfaction in the end. Sometimes I’ll try to read someone else’s take on the matter if they’ve showed interest in doing the math and write it out for all to see, but when my head starts to hurt I’ll just stop reading.
But what I can tell you, as a basic, basic math lesson, is that the numbers don’t add up in NY. When the cap is set at around 57 million ($56.7 to be exact), and you have three guys each making around $7 million (Hank about 6.8, and Gomez and Drury both over 7), that is around $21 million – which is around 37% of your total cap room. Add Wade Redden’s 6.5 million (which, mathematicians, yes, yes, is close to 7, very good!) to the mix, and you now have those four players making close to $28 million of your salary – which is (wait for it, wait for it) – 49% of your total to spend. And once again, mathematicians, come on now, don’t let me down – yes! yes, 49 is just a hair under 50. Which is half! The New York Rangers have four players (4 players!) on their roster being paid almost, just about, essentially, when it comes right down to it pretty much half of their total allotted money. And no, no, Wayne Gretzky is not one of them. Neither are Mark Messier, Bobby Orr, Maurice Richard, Gordie Howe, or Mario Lemieux in their best days. They are Scott Gomez, Chris Drury, Wade Redden, and Henrik Lundqvist. Now, I’m not taking a swipe at Hank. (haha, who during Tuesday’s show either Jim Tatti, Gary Green, or Mike Ross called Henrik Lundstrom on air. It was pretty hilarious. Who’s Lundstrom? Seriously. Maybe the Rangers can sign him too!) Lundqvist has been nominated for a Vezina in his first three years, had 10 shutouts last season, and won a gold medal for his country two years ago. For all honesty, he is not the argument here. NY has a great goalie in him, one that will hopefully only get better, and you have to pay your goalie to keep him in town. All teams need that one big franchise goalie to carry the team in order to be successful. But Chris Drury, whos Mr. Clutch routine Rangers fans have seen more of from the wrong side (cue game 5 of the 2007 Eastern Semi finals), Scott Gomez, who can be good, but is not, not, not, not supposed to be any teams top $ maker, and Wade Redden, the guy who EVERYONE even HIMSELF agreed would be and should be taking a pay cut this year after a abysmal year last year – they are all making close to, if not exceeding $7 million dollars. They are NOT worth it. End of story.
Now one can argue – what does it matter? What if the team plays perfectly this year, is competitive, and performs up to and beyond all expectations. But honestly, the odds of that are? The odds are better that the team will not play perfectly, let’s not kid ourselves. But that’s not even the issue. The issue is how much money they have tied up for how many years! Hank’s was a six year deal. Drury’s was for five. Redden’s is 6. And Gomez’s was for 7! That is a lot of money over a long period of time. So, the point is, the Rangers have handicapped themselves not only for this year, but for at least the next four or five years to come. And that is what concerns me more. I’m concerned in general (for Rangers fans that’s part of the deal), but I’m REALLY concerned about that. $7 x 4 = $28 million. $28 = $56.7/2. Which all equals the fact that the Rangers are screwed!!! Mathematics lesson over, kids.
Some boring (even to me) but quick hits. . .
-I swear, you take a week off writing a blog, turn on morning radio, and all of a sudden the Kings are relocating to Kansas City? But yet I can’t find anything about this. Was this a joke? Seriously, someone clue me in. I don’t think Kansas City appreciated what they had (and goodness knows they could have cared less about the train wreck that is the Royals – although they have pretty blue uniforms!) so why they should get a team is already something I don’t quite understand. But LA. LA is going to be good. Really good I hope. LA is the foundation that Gretzky built in the States. The Kings can’t move. Can they? Did someone just start speculating because the Kings and Blues are playing a pre-season game there in a couple months? Did I hear it all wrong? In the early morning or late afternoon, that is very possible.
-Mark Parrish was bought out in Minnesota. Apparently the team was trying to make it seem as if it was not personal. But, how can they say that when they knew their cap situation in advance, and they just recently brought in Owen Nolan for approximately the same amount of money as Parrish was making (all according to XM204). So if they knew their cap situation at all, which one would hope as a professional ice hockey team that they did, they apparently did have a choice on which player they wanted. So how is that not personal?
-The Sundin debate that has raged on and on, and on and on, finally ends tomorrow. Or does it?
More on that tomorrow, I’m sure. Even though rumors are swirling that even five or six teams (still including the NYRs) are in the mix, I’ll stick to Vancouver and Montreal being the front runners. And if he wants to stay East more than he wants the money (which of course is a BIG IF), my money is on Montreal. Stay tuned.
Class dismissed.
In the last “more than a week” there’s been a lot of talk on XM204 about moves teams made, moves teams didn’t make, good, bad, or indifferent. Now, I remember listening to The Power Play on last Tuesday I believe, and they were having a conversation about the New York Rangers. *sigh* As a Rangers fan, it didn’t sound good. But, as a Rangers fan, I can’t say that I disagree with much they said. The hosts said that they didn’t know what to think of the Rangers. They didn’t see much sense with the Wade Redden deal (see below). And overall they were not sure WHY this team seriously overspent for so many players last year and again this year, which inevitably only serves to tie up A LOT of cap money. Because honestly it’s not an issue of will this team mesh, will the plan (or lack thereof) work? And goodness knows that I am hoping with all my heart that Marcus Naslund wakes up and thinks it is 2002, that whoever the heck is on the point on the power play actually shoots the puck (at the net!), that the young guys get a chance to play, that Hank Lundqvist gets his consistency going early and often, and that either (and hopefully both) Chris Drury and Scott Gomez make Rangers fans say, yes, damn, now that’s why we got that guy. But rather, it’s merely an issue of basic mathematics.
And before I continue, I must say that even though I’m better than average at math, I am not the type of fan who sits there calculating the room their team is under the cap (or over the cap) and how many (and which) players would have to be moved to make adequate cap space for [fill in the blank]. I can’t. Seriously, it seems like too much work for me that might not yield much satisfaction in the end. Sometimes I’ll try to read someone else’s take on the matter if they’ve showed interest in doing the math and write it out for all to see, but when my head starts to hurt I’ll just stop reading.
But what I can tell you, as a basic, basic math lesson, is that the numbers don’t add up in NY. When the cap is set at around 57 million ($56.7 to be exact), and you have three guys each making around $7 million (Hank about 6.8, and Gomez and Drury both over 7), that is around $21 million – which is around 37% of your total cap room. Add Wade Redden’s 6.5 million (which, mathematicians, yes, yes, is close to 7, very good!) to the mix, and you now have those four players making close to $28 million of your salary – which is (wait for it, wait for it) – 49% of your total to spend. And once again, mathematicians, come on now, don’t let me down – yes! yes, 49 is just a hair under 50. Which is half! The New York Rangers have four players (4 players!) on their roster being paid almost, just about, essentially, when it comes right down to it pretty much half of their total allotted money. And no, no, Wayne Gretzky is not one of them. Neither are Mark Messier, Bobby Orr, Maurice Richard, Gordie Howe, or Mario Lemieux in their best days. They are Scott Gomez, Chris Drury, Wade Redden, and Henrik Lundqvist. Now, I’m not taking a swipe at Hank. (haha, who during Tuesday’s show either Jim Tatti, Gary Green, or Mike Ross called Henrik Lundstrom on air. It was pretty hilarious. Who’s Lundstrom? Seriously. Maybe the Rangers can sign him too!) Lundqvist has been nominated for a Vezina in his first three years, had 10 shutouts last season, and won a gold medal for his country two years ago. For all honesty, he is not the argument here. NY has a great goalie in him, one that will hopefully only get better, and you have to pay your goalie to keep him in town. All teams need that one big franchise goalie to carry the team in order to be successful. But Chris Drury, whos Mr. Clutch routine Rangers fans have seen more of from the wrong side (cue game 5 of the 2007 Eastern Semi finals), Scott Gomez, who can be good, but is not, not, not, not supposed to be any teams top $ maker, and Wade Redden, the guy who EVERYONE even HIMSELF agreed would be and should be taking a pay cut this year after a abysmal year last year – they are all making close to, if not exceeding $7 million dollars. They are NOT worth it. End of story.
Now one can argue – what does it matter? What if the team plays perfectly this year, is competitive, and performs up to and beyond all expectations. But honestly, the odds of that are? The odds are better that the team will not play perfectly, let’s not kid ourselves. But that’s not even the issue. The issue is how much money they have tied up for how many years! Hank’s was a six year deal. Drury’s was for five. Redden’s is 6. And Gomez’s was for 7! That is a lot of money over a long period of time. So, the point is, the Rangers have handicapped themselves not only for this year, but for at least the next four or five years to come. And that is what concerns me more. I’m concerned in general (for Rangers fans that’s part of the deal), but I’m REALLY concerned about that. $7 x 4 = $28 million. $28 = $56.7/2. Which all equals the fact that the Rangers are screwed!!! Mathematics lesson over, kids.
Some boring (even to me) but quick hits. . .
-I swear, you take a week off writing a blog, turn on morning radio, and all of a sudden the Kings are relocating to Kansas City? But yet I can’t find anything about this. Was this a joke? Seriously, someone clue me in. I don’t think Kansas City appreciated what they had (and goodness knows they could have cared less about the train wreck that is the Royals – although they have pretty blue uniforms!) so why they should get a team is already something I don’t quite understand. But LA. LA is going to be good. Really good I hope. LA is the foundation that Gretzky built in the States. The Kings can’t move. Can they? Did someone just start speculating because the Kings and Blues are playing a pre-season game there in a couple months? Did I hear it all wrong? In the early morning or late afternoon, that is very possible.
-Mark Parrish was bought out in Minnesota. Apparently the team was trying to make it seem as if it was not personal. But, how can they say that when they knew their cap situation in advance, and they just recently brought in Owen Nolan for approximately the same amount of money as Parrish was making (all according to XM204). So if they knew their cap situation at all, which one would hope as a professional ice hockey team that they did, they apparently did have a choice on which player they wanted. So how is that not personal?
-The Sundin debate that has raged on and on, and on and on, finally ends tomorrow. Or does it?
More on that tomorrow, I’m sure. Even though rumors are swirling that even five or six teams (still including the NYRs) are in the mix, I’ll stick to Vancouver and Montreal being the front runners. And if he wants to stay East more than he wants the money (which of course is a BIG IF), my money is on Montreal. Stay tuned.
Class dismissed.
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
Reflections on Day One of Free Agent Frenzy. . .
So after spending all possible hours yesterday listening to sports radio online (courtesy of our Northern neighbors – Happy Belated Canada Day) – and including bringing my blackberry with TSN.ca updates into a giant company meeting to get up to the minute updates on Free Agent Frenzy Day - I took a break. I went to a play, turned off my phone, stowed my blackberry. And it wasn’t until intermission that I heard the news:
Wade Redden signs with the New York Rangers for 6 years at $6.5 million a year.
I honestly almost vomited over the balcony. I guess the excitement that built up yesterday (who doesn’t love the …breaking news…trade and signing updates cutting into your broadcast) eventually gave way to that nausea again. It was just a matter of time.
Before yesterday, I’d been silent in saying who I wanted (and who I didn’t want) the Rangers to sign. But, since what happened yesterday happened, I’ll tell you. I would have liked Brian Campbell. I would have liked Mark Streit even more, because he’d come cheaper and I saw how he complemented Montreal’s scoring. I did not want Wade Redden. I watched enough hockey this past season to know that while everyone in Ottawa struggled, Redden looked to be among the worst, and the unhappiest. The “great” Wade Redden – if he could be called great – looked like a shadow of himself. His plus/minus average might have still been good, but his numbers dwindled. He was, while not entirely responsible for, nonetheless party to, one of the biggest collapses I’ve seen in my time watching hockey. Ottawa soared to start the season, and then crashed in a fiery heap back down to Earth by the end. And not that I really think that has anything directly to do with Redden. He might very well be a steady defenseman for the Rangers – at some point in the next six years. Maybe he’ll be the savior on D that they’ve been looking for.
But what I have a serious problem with is the term and the salary. Am I crazy or did I think that it made more sense in the post-lockout world to pay either big money short term or lesser money long term? That players should expect one but not both unless they were super special players that were all but guaranteed to deliver the goods and the goals (or the stops if they happened to be a goalie!) I am most likely completely wrong in this human and short-sided thought process. If the signing went through at 4 years at $4 million per, I’d be elated. A decent amount of time, but not too long. And a salary more indicative of the player Redden has become and not the player he once was. Even if it were $4.5 or $5 if you want to argue with me that he’s more than a $4 million dollar a year player. Fine. But 6.5! Exactly .6 less than Brian Campbell got in Chicago. All for a guy that might not work out at all. Ever. I know some people change teams to get a fresh perspective and it ends up making the world of difference. But what do you think the ratio is of players that come to NY and succeed versus those that come here and fail? I’ll tell you what – NY is tough. Some great players succeed here. The rare and special ones become legends. But so many get spit right back out. Is this where you’d want to go to get your career back on track?
In the other big Rangers signing…Michael Rozsival for 4 years at $5 million. I like Rozie just fine, but I think that’s overpaid. But apparently that was what he was asking and that’s what they were paying. And that’s how the game is played. At least if you aren’t Sean Avery.
Best news of the day and the only news that got me to sleep last night: Rangers resigning Steve Valiquette as the backup. Guy was steady. Played very well against the Flyers and the Leafs. And, honestly, if this season goes downhill quickly (ever a more growing possibility), I want this guy around to do post game interviews. Funny, and eloquent, to no end. He’s a keeper. And thankfully not a bad goalie, you know, in case Hank Lundqvist’s headaches come back or those knees act up, which I obviously pray they do not.
I reserve the right to see what Wade Redden brings to the table and how he fits in. I hope - I HOPE – that my original inclinations are wrong and that he has a long and successful career in New York. Honestly, for my sanity I do. But, we won’t know. And for a guy who was supposedly going to be taking less money (because of the bad year he admitted he had) to be given $6.5 million a year – he better step up. He better come to play. I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt when he puts on the jersey this fall, but even though he isn’t replacing anyone specifically (Rangers defense has been lacking a big name or a big talent for as long as Brian Leetch has been gone) – he still has big shoes to fill.
And it’s not even like we have any clearer idea of who is going to be scoring goals for this team either! The big free agents (Marian Hossa and Mats Sundin) as well as all of the rest of the Rangers UFAs remain dangling for another day.
In other news around the league, around 3pm I’ll admit it, I kind of lost track of the goalies entirely. Seriously, how many goalies found new homes? I was kind of taken aback. Now granted, a few are backup type guys like Ty Conklin in Detroit. But honestly, I spent years still thinking Dominik Hasek was still a Sabre, even when he had already moved onto Ottawa and Detroit. Give me at least until December to realize that Andrew Raycroft is in Colorado and that Alex Auld is in Buffalo. As if that matters. At least I’ll never forget Curtis Joseph is a Leaf. Ain’t nothin’ gonna break their stride, Woah-oh, Cu-Jo, Maple Leafs gonna keep on moving. (Confused? Yeah, well changing Matthew Wilder’s lyrics one bored day made more sense back in the 2001 playoffs).
Anyway, Chicago looks like they are poised to have an exciting season. Their young rookies. A steady D-man locked up to big money for a long 8-year period. And Cristobal Huet? I swear, wasn’t it just Monday I was mentioning good old Nikolai Kha-ha-ha-ha-ha-bibulin? He never really made the big difference in Chicago that everyone thought he would. Does this mean he heading out of town? And an even bigger and more important question. It was Hu-ay in Montreal. HueT in Washington. So, Cristobal, what do you want us to call you in Chi-town?
I never, never thought Bobby Holik was going back to New Jersey. I really didn’t. The guy, upset by arbitration negotiations, crossed the river to New York. His way of playing didn’t mesh with the Rangers consistent lack of a game plan and plethora of overpriced talent. $9 million dollars of wasted time. I never appreciated Bobby Holik when he was a Devil and his sometimes calling out his teammates used to bug me when he was a Ranger. But he was and still remains a good guy. A polite guy. And a good American citizen. (I love my Czechs. So many of them appreciate what they came from and where they are now.) For this, I admire him and I wish him well in NJ. Except for the 8 times a year they play the Rangers. As for Brian Rolston – I know many teams would have loved to have him. I would have liked him on my team. But…he returns to where it all began. Good for him. Hey Jon Bon Jovi, who says you can’t go home?
And so the first day of Free Agent Frenzy came to an end. I experienced excitement, nail biting, nausea, and yet somehow, I got a contented night of sleep. Heck, I have 3 months and change before the season truly starts, and years and years and years and years and years and years (that was six years in case you missed it!) to get over the potential damage that this day may have caused.
Wade Redden signs with the New York Rangers for 6 years at $6.5 million a year.
I honestly almost vomited over the balcony. I guess the excitement that built up yesterday (who doesn’t love the …breaking news…trade and signing updates cutting into your broadcast) eventually gave way to that nausea again. It was just a matter of time.
Before yesterday, I’d been silent in saying who I wanted (and who I didn’t want) the Rangers to sign. But, since what happened yesterday happened, I’ll tell you. I would have liked Brian Campbell. I would have liked Mark Streit even more, because he’d come cheaper and I saw how he complemented Montreal’s scoring. I did not want Wade Redden. I watched enough hockey this past season to know that while everyone in Ottawa struggled, Redden looked to be among the worst, and the unhappiest. The “great” Wade Redden – if he could be called great – looked like a shadow of himself. His plus/minus average might have still been good, but his numbers dwindled. He was, while not entirely responsible for, nonetheless party to, one of the biggest collapses I’ve seen in my time watching hockey. Ottawa soared to start the season, and then crashed in a fiery heap back down to Earth by the end. And not that I really think that has anything directly to do with Redden. He might very well be a steady defenseman for the Rangers – at some point in the next six years. Maybe he’ll be the savior on D that they’ve been looking for.
But what I have a serious problem with is the term and the salary. Am I crazy or did I think that it made more sense in the post-lockout world to pay either big money short term or lesser money long term? That players should expect one but not both unless they were super special players that were all but guaranteed to deliver the goods and the goals (or the stops if they happened to be a goalie!) I am most likely completely wrong in this human and short-sided thought process. If the signing went through at 4 years at $4 million per, I’d be elated. A decent amount of time, but not too long. And a salary more indicative of the player Redden has become and not the player he once was. Even if it were $4.5 or $5 if you want to argue with me that he’s more than a $4 million dollar a year player. Fine. But 6.5! Exactly .6 less than Brian Campbell got in Chicago. All for a guy that might not work out at all. Ever. I know some people change teams to get a fresh perspective and it ends up making the world of difference. But what do you think the ratio is of players that come to NY and succeed versus those that come here and fail? I’ll tell you what – NY is tough. Some great players succeed here. The rare and special ones become legends. But so many get spit right back out. Is this where you’d want to go to get your career back on track?
In the other big Rangers signing…Michael Rozsival for 4 years at $5 million. I like Rozie just fine, but I think that’s overpaid. But apparently that was what he was asking and that’s what they were paying. And that’s how the game is played. At least if you aren’t Sean Avery.
Best news of the day and the only news that got me to sleep last night: Rangers resigning Steve Valiquette as the backup. Guy was steady. Played very well against the Flyers and the Leafs. And, honestly, if this season goes downhill quickly (ever a more growing possibility), I want this guy around to do post game interviews. Funny, and eloquent, to no end. He’s a keeper. And thankfully not a bad goalie, you know, in case Hank Lundqvist’s headaches come back or those knees act up, which I obviously pray they do not.
I reserve the right to see what Wade Redden brings to the table and how he fits in. I hope - I HOPE – that my original inclinations are wrong and that he has a long and successful career in New York. Honestly, for my sanity I do. But, we won’t know. And for a guy who was supposedly going to be taking less money (because of the bad year he admitted he had) to be given $6.5 million a year – he better step up. He better come to play. I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt when he puts on the jersey this fall, but even though he isn’t replacing anyone specifically (Rangers defense has been lacking a big name or a big talent for as long as Brian Leetch has been gone) – he still has big shoes to fill.
And it’s not even like we have any clearer idea of who is going to be scoring goals for this team either! The big free agents (Marian Hossa and Mats Sundin) as well as all of the rest of the Rangers UFAs remain dangling for another day.
In other news around the league, around 3pm I’ll admit it, I kind of lost track of the goalies entirely. Seriously, how many goalies found new homes? I was kind of taken aback. Now granted, a few are backup type guys like Ty Conklin in Detroit. But honestly, I spent years still thinking Dominik Hasek was still a Sabre, even when he had already moved onto Ottawa and Detroit. Give me at least until December to realize that Andrew Raycroft is in Colorado and that Alex Auld is in Buffalo. As if that matters. At least I’ll never forget Curtis Joseph is a Leaf. Ain’t nothin’ gonna break their stride, Woah-oh, Cu-Jo, Maple Leafs gonna keep on moving. (Confused? Yeah, well changing Matthew Wilder’s lyrics one bored day made more sense back in the 2001 playoffs).
Anyway, Chicago looks like they are poised to have an exciting season. Their young rookies. A steady D-man locked up to big money for a long 8-year period. And Cristobal Huet? I swear, wasn’t it just Monday I was mentioning good old Nikolai Kha-ha-ha-ha-ha-bibulin? He never really made the big difference in Chicago that everyone thought he would. Does this mean he heading out of town? And an even bigger and more important question. It was Hu-ay in Montreal. HueT in Washington. So, Cristobal, what do you want us to call you in Chi-town?
I never, never thought Bobby Holik was going back to New Jersey. I really didn’t. The guy, upset by arbitration negotiations, crossed the river to New York. His way of playing didn’t mesh with the Rangers consistent lack of a game plan and plethora of overpriced talent. $9 million dollars of wasted time. I never appreciated Bobby Holik when he was a Devil and his sometimes calling out his teammates used to bug me when he was a Ranger. But he was and still remains a good guy. A polite guy. And a good American citizen. (I love my Czechs. So many of them appreciate what they came from and where they are now.) For this, I admire him and I wish him well in NJ. Except for the 8 times a year they play the Rangers. As for Brian Rolston – I know many teams would have loved to have him. I would have liked him on my team. But…he returns to where it all began. Good for him. Hey Jon Bon Jovi, who says you can’t go home?
And so the first day of Free Agent Frenzy came to an end. I experienced excitement, nail biting, nausea, and yet somehow, I got a contented night of sleep. Heck, I have 3 months and change before the season truly starts, and years and years and years and years and years and years (that was six years in case you missed it!) to get over the potential damage that this day may have caused.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
