You are ignoring the 8 additional years before that where they were unwatchable
- mdw7413

I think you mean 48 years.

I agree on trying some call ups, guys are too comfortable right now.
- nyrangers9479

Lettieri, Pionk and Deangelo, I mean why the (frank) did we trade for him to give up after less than a month? Another astounding move by the Rangers front office

Lettieri, Pionk and Deangelo, I mean why the (frank) did we trade for him to give up after less than a month? Another astounding move by the Rangers front office
- KreiderBomb

Because you have to establish and keep a culture of competition. If you let players play just because you traded for them and they don't deserve to play that's pretty much establishes a diseased culture.

That they were, but the years that they had 91 and 90 points are so similar to what the Rangers now. If they got in they wouldn't have won, but they weren't bad enough to get impact players in the draft.
- tomburton99

You do realize there is a difference between adding players and making some tough decisions and "blowing it up" like you say.

If you want to get rid of most of the team, we will suck for a long time. There is not one team that turned over their playoff roster and was good very quickly.

I mean the rangers have beaten both the bolts and jackets this year. Not saying it would be easy but I would rather take the chance and see it come playoff time
- TPC

Come on Matt, you're smarter than this, in a 7 game series the Rangers don't stand a chance, like Herb said "if we play them 10 times they may beats us 9" that's the same here, winning a regular season game doesn't compare, that's like Buffalo beating the Bolts, so that means they can beat them in a 7 game series?

I think you mean 48 years.
- Tonybere

I was more going by playoff appearances.

Lettieri, Pionk and Deangelo, I mean why the (frank) did we trade for him to give up after less than a month? Another astounding move by the Rangers front office
- KreiderBomb

I gotta agree with Pete V here, Vin. DeAngelo wasn't good when he was here. And no matter if you agree or disagree with his opinions on social media, he keeps shooting himself in the foot.

Because you have to establish and keep a culture of competition. If you let players play just because you traded for them and they don't deserve to play that's pretty much establishes a diseased culture.
- Pete V

What's the point when it's already diseased?

That they were, but the years that they had 91 and 90 points are so similar to what the Rangers now. If they got in they wouldn't have won, but they weren't bad enough to get impact players in the draft.

Edit: And then Brian Burke traded ended up being Tyler Seguin and Dougie Hamilton for Phil Kessel in 2009 so that set them back even further.
- tomburton99

Don't forget Rask for Raycroft!!

I gotta agree with Pete V here, Vin. DeAngelo wasn't good when he was here. And no matter if you agree or disagree with his opinions on social media, he keeps shooting himself in the foot.
- tomburton99

He barely got a good look, AV with most rookies didn't trust him so off ya go, his career is already done with NY, we had potential with that trade

You do realize there is a difference between adding players and making some tough decisions and "blowing it up" like you say.

If you want to get rid of most of the team, we will suck for a long time. There is not one team that turned over their playoff roster and was good very quickly.
- mdw7413

I'm fine with ghat. If that means the Rangers end up getting a foundation to build around like the Kings, Lightning, Blackhawks or Penguins I'd be thrilled. Hell even if they got one of the best players in hockey out it I'd be happy.

Come on Matt, you're smarter than this, in a 7 game series the Rangers don't stand a chance, like Herb said "if we play them 10 times they may beats us 9" that's the same here, winning a regular season game doesn't compare, that's like Buffalo beating the Bolts, so that means they can beat them in a 7 game series?
- KreiderBomb

I think the point we are making Vin, is anything could happen in the playoffs. Look at Ottawa last year. They certainly weren't considered better than us. They won.

I would rather take the chances in the playoffs even as a flawed team than be a poopty team that doesn't make the playoffs

Don't forget Rask for Raycroft!!
- Tonybere

That wasn't Burke, that was JFJ.

You do realize there is a difference between adding players and making some tough decisions and "blowing it up" like you say.

If you want to get rid of most of the team, we will suck for a long time. There is not one team that turned over their playoff roster and was good very quickly.
- mdw7413

They don't need to blow it up to the ground but they should not be anywhere near buyers, they should be sellers and nothing else, give up this charade

I think you mean 48 years.
- Tonybere

Don't discourage the kid, Tony

I'm fine with ghat. If that means the Rangers end up getting a foundation to build around like the Kings, Lightning, Blackhawks or Penguins I'd be thrilled. Hell even if they got one of the best players in hockey out it I'd be happy.
- tomburton99

I guess we just wont agree. Because I could care less if we had one of the best players and still sucked.

I guess we just wont agree. Because I could care less if we had one of the best players and still sucked.
- mdw7413

It usually leads to success. The Panthers, Sabres and Oilers would the counter argument to my opinion.

I think the point we are making Vin, is anything could happen in the playoffs. Look at Ottawa last year. They certainly weren't considered better than us. They won.

I would rather take the chances in the playoffs even as a flawed team than be a poopty team that doesn't make the playoffs
- mdw7413

I'm done with this fantasy, it's never gonna happen, we're not gonna win on hope, Ottawa didn't win the Stanley Cup, they didn't even play for it, losing in the ECF would have been still failure

Don't discourage the kid, Tony
- 21peter

Going by playoffs. Since that is what I'm discussing about the Rangers. Keep up.

Lettieri, Pionk and Deangelo, I mean why the (frank) did we trade for him to give up after less than a month? Another astounding move by the Rangers front office
- KreiderBomb

I've read a few reports saying Deangelo has looked AWFUL in Hartford

It usually leads to success. The Panthers, Sabres and Oilers would the counter argument to my opinion.
- tomburton99

Exactly. So my point remains I would rather be competitive with a chance than poopty and get a good player and still be poopty

I've read a few reports saying Deangelo has looked AWFUL in Hartford
- 21peter

Fake News.

Going by playoffs. Since that is what I'm discussing about the Rangers. Keep up.
- mdw7413

The brilliant minds of you guys just move too fast for me

Fake News.
- tomburton99

Exactly. So my point remains I would rather be competitive with a chance than poopty and get a good player and still be poopty
- mdw7413

They have had chances and it ended up with one ECF. Looking back on history, nobody cares about a conference championship if it doesn't result in a Stanley Cup victory.