this is a team at the top of the possession metrics charts for years now. They then completely luck into the #2 overall pick in the draft last year which they use to draft some much needed offense.
Last year they were easily a playoff team if they had even league average or slightly subpar goaltending - instead we saw them dominate the Rangers 5x5 but Darling was giving up goals high schoolers don't give up.
Is it more of the same in net for them this year? I cant believe they still suck... kind of Edmonton east at this point but at least McDavid had the one good quarterfinals Game 7 year...
Also, Mika might have played his best game last night. He was everywhere.
Brassard looks to be on the verge of getting traded by Pittsburgh. Mixed record for Gorton so far but he absolutely nailed that trade. Timed it perfectly. Mika still only 25 and locked up for three more seasons. 41 points in 46 games now
I'm not arguing the merits of that trade, but is 41 points in 46 games good for a #1 C?
Also, Mika might have played his best game last night. He was everywhere.
Brassard looks to be on the verge of getting traded by Pittsburgh. Mixed record for Gorton so far but he absolutely nailed that trade. Timed it perfectly. Mika still only 25 and locked up for three more seasons. 41 points in 46 games now
I'm not arguing the merits of that trade, but is 41 points in 46 games good for a #1 C?
Yes. What does that pace extrapolate to for a whole season? 75 points?
That's usually a top 10 - 15 center.
doesn't factor in defense which obviously is important for a C, but that's a great pace.
Right now Zibanejad is tied for 29th in points among Centers Â
Of course, a better analysis would be on 5x5 scoring, etc... just saying he's a nice player, but I'd be looking to accumulate assets from one of him or Hayes this trade deadline since cost effective Centers unlike a vet expiring wing like Zuccarello ... will get us a nice haul in return.
For a while there were only a handful of 80+ point guys. About 8-10 each season. Last season there were about 20. See the link below
So I think 70+ point pace is pretty good. Maybe not an upper tier 1C, but still solid. Ideally you get a true elite talent soon and Mika slots in on the second line. But you could do worse.
The debate went on for years about whether Stepan was a 1C and he never broke 60. So I'm happy with the progress shown by Zib and Kreider this season. Advanced stats on Mika are excellent as well.
Rangers haven't had a player hit 70 points since Gaborik in 2012. Just a random observation Link - ( New Window )
are all playing at a high level as they enter their prime years in the NHL. I'm not sure I would trade any of them at this point. Sign Hayes and build around this core for the next 5 years adding talented kids and a few top Free Agents.
are not Lias Anderson type players. Although it's far too early to make a judgement on Lias.
Regardless, the Rangers have the fewest non shootout wins in the league. I like some of what they've shown offensively. Kreider and Zib have taken a step forward. And Chytil shows promise. But they are not close to contending. Hayes has given them exactly what they needed, a career year to boost his trade value. Take advantage.
Chytil, also a good player, I think may wind up at wing.
but people expecting every NHL 1st round pick to be Auston Matthews are in for a let down.
these are 17/18 year old kids who are drafted, not 22/23 years old kids like in the NFL or NBA.
Even MLB (with similar ages for high school draftees) is pretty hit or miss in the 1st round.
It's hard to project a 17/18 year old playing against other 17/18 year old players to play against players much older and players more developed physically - a lot of projection for most of these guys.
but in the case of Andersson I think he'll be a good player.
And I'd probably trade Hayes and Zucarello if there was a good return though I can see Hayes sticking around now that he's playing like most people expected him to play.
are all playing at a high level as they enter their prime years in the NHL. I'm not sure I would trade any of them at this point. Sign Hayes and build around this core for the next 5 years adding talented kids and a few top Free Agents.
NYR is not so far off.
They are most certainly far off and the guys you listed will soon a) require bigger cap hits and b) by the time we are hopefully ready to contend again (3 years minimum unless we draft like Boston did), they will past their primes and older/expensive.
Rebuilding is a multi year effort. It wasn't - trade Nash, Grabner,
McDonaugh and now Zuccs - and call it a day. If aren't anywhere closer to competing today than we were last year and we traded our captain then - so hopefully one of Hayes or Ziba is dealt for mutiple assets. We have plenty of centers next year anyway assuming Lias moves to a depth C slot.
with Hayes. Not like Kreider who has another year on his deal and they can afford to wait while maybe being open to hearing offers (not advocating trading CK, just an example to compare). Can't take the chance on losing Hayes for nothing to free agency.
So what kind of contract would it cost to re-sign him in season? He would only accept a one year deal over the summer because he wanted to get to UFA as quick as possible. So there's no discount to be had here. JT Miller got 5 years and 5.2 per from Tampa. Start there but increase when factoring in Hayes being a natural center, IMO now a better player, and no Florida state income tax. 5 year and 6 million? I don't know, that may be too rich for me.
But yeah, I guess if the rangers are awarded cheap contract 3rd line forwards and 2nd pair Dmen from all other 30 teams, we could be back to the playoffs in no time!
At the moment we are wondering as aimlessly as Detroit and Philly as far as getting back to prominence. Last years sell off was a good start and maybe Zuccs was kept this summer for leadership -- but it's time to stop winning games and accumulate assets and hopefully a top 5 pick!!
500 team now and from what I can see improving the past 4-5 games.
Let some of these kids continue to get PT and develop plus add a few high end FA players (Panarin, etc) in the off season and we are contenders with Hank.
One of 8 teams in hockey (31 teams) with fewer wins than regulation losses - so not even .500 under the little league mentality of determining .500 which makes everyone feel like a winner (i.e. Participation trophy)
13 regulation wins all year against 20 regulation losses
But yes, better last 4 games. Hard to look worse than that stretch vs Pittsburgh - Colorado - Arizona
I think Rangers don't contend for a cup until 2020/21 season Â
and should consider trading both Kreider, Hayes & Zucc this year because none are likely to go up in value between now and the 2020/21 season... and I hate saying that because I love all 3 players.
But this team needs some top tier talent. I'm content watching them rebuild so long as they are willing to pay the price (exchanging fan favorite players in return for sufficient draft value to enable them to position for truly premium draft talent)
and 20 losses is basically a 500 club, regardless of the win types.
This team has warts all over the place, I get it - but I think they have a solid foundation of players to build on now. I'm not into the whole tank thing, but I respect those that are and it's not a point to debate.
The draft is a crap shoot - I prefer to keep guy's like Hayes, Zib, Kreids...
RE: I think Rangers don't contend for a cup until 2020/21 season Â
and should consider trading both Kreider, Hayes & Zucc this year because none are likely to go up in value between now and the 2020/21 season... and I hate saying that because I love all 3 players.
But this team needs some top tier talent. I'm content watching them rebuild so long as they are willing to pay the price (exchanging fan favorite players in return for sufficient draft value to enable them to position for truly premium draft talent)
The problem I have with that Bill is there is no guarantee you are going to get players like Kreids and Hayes in the draft or in trade return. These guys now are in their prime years, why deal them?
RE: RE: I think Rangers don't contend for a cup until 2020/21 season Â
and should consider trading both Kreider, Hayes & Zucc this year because none are likely to go up in value between now and the 2020/21 season... and I hate saying that because I love all 3 players.
But this team needs some top tier talent. I'm content watching them rebuild so long as they are willing to pay the price (exchanging fan favorite players in return for sufficient draft value to enable them to position for truly premium draft talent)
The problem I have with that Bill is there is no guarantee you are going to get players like Kreids and Hayes in the draft or in trade return. These guys now are in their prime years, why deal them?
Because I want the Rangers to be at the beginning of their real upswing in the 2020/21 season with their prime assets doing nothing but growing in talent for the following 5 years... and I don't see Kreider, Hayes or Zucc meeting that definition. Kreider and Hayes will probably be at the height of their talent for the next 3 years culminating in 2020/21. I think the Rangers need talent that extends from 2020/21, not talent that falls off after 2020/21.
It's great to see what earlier this season were boys ... come of age.
Well done, Bill. Couldn't have said it better myself.
The good news is unlike Buffalo, Florida and Carolina which are stuck in what seems like eternal hell... when we are ready to contend again in 3 years, we can actually recruit to build around young drafted players ... better than Hayes, Kreisler, Zibanejad and Shattenkirk for that matter... and get back quickly.
I think there is value in keeping some players in their primes. Â
It’s good for the kids to play with some competent pros as they develop.
I also think it’s a fantasy to assume that we’re gong to contend in 2-3 years if we unload players like Kreider and Hayes. How long was Edmonton crap, even with all their top picks? Us having a ton of picks guarantees us nothing.
It's great to see what earlier this season were boys ... come of age.
Well done, Bill. Couldn't have said it better myself.
The good news is unlike Buffalo, Florida and Carolina which are stuck in what seems like eternal hell... when we are ready to contend again in 3 years, we can actually recruit to build around young drafted players ... better than Hayes, Kreisler, Zibanejad and Shattenkirk for that matter... and get back quickly.
I've never felt otherwise. We've simply disagreed on my getting enjoyment from watching them play.
RE: I think there is value in keeping some players in their primes. Â
It’s good for the kids to play with some competent pros as they develop.
I also think it’s a fantasy to assume that we’re gong to contend in 2-3 years if we unload players like Kreider and Hayes. How long was Edmonton crap, even with all their top picks? Us having a ton of picks guarantees us nothing.
Yat. That may turn out to be true. After all, in my book the Rangers have still not won a Cup since 1940, and why would I think getting a bunch of draft picks is going to change things over the next 3 years?
But, as much as I've loved watching Kreider, I just don't see his upside being much more than what it is now. And the bottom line is the Rangers don't have a guy you build a franchise around... a LT or Barkley. I want to see them be patient and try to build through the draft... and hope they develop enough talent internally so they can finally win a Cup without having to import another team - wholesale - to do it.
But there are just very few Crosbys or Matthews that come along. I dont see Hughes as being that kind of difference maker.
As for Kreider, he is what he will be, a fine power forward with exceptional speed. We’d be lucky to land a kid with that talent level in the middle of the 1st round, which is essentially what a trade would yield.
Kreider I'm assuming would return more than one 1st rounder Â
McDonaugh returned more than that. Agree, I wouldnt let him go for that cheap.
The difference between us and Edmonton or Buffalo or Carolina... is when we are ready to compete again with a good young nucleus (all of the recent draft picks plus hopefully two years picking in the top 5 or at least top 10 plus picks from other teams acquired in future trades) -- the Rangers have proven they can recruit better than most if not all the other franchises.
And with a year and a half left on his deal, Kreider's situation is tricky. But I think Kreider and Zib are the two vets we look to keep and add to the young core. Each have taken their game up a notch this season and are still relatively young.
After all, in my book the Rangers have still not won a Cup since 1940
Did the Rangers not earn the Cup in 1994?
Five members of that team were Rangers... unlike the Giants of 1986 who legitimately brought a SB to the team without having to go out and "buy" a SB ... the Rangers were not much more than "Edmonton lite" ... I watched... I was excited and thrilled... but it isn't as though 1994 purged the wait from 1940 by the organization finally figuring out how to build a team through the draft ... they did a great job importing a team from the outside. I'm still waiting for the "real Rangers'" to win a Cup.
After all, in my book the Rangers have still not won a Cup since 1940
Did the Rangers not earn the Cup in 1994?
Five members of that team were Rangers... unlike the Giants of 1986 who legitimately brought a SB to the team without having to go out and "buy" a SB ... the Rangers were not much more than "Edmonton lite" ... I watched... I was excited and thrilled... but it isn't as though 1994 purged the wait from 1940 by the organization finally figuring out how to build a team through the draft ... they did a great job importing a team from the outside. I'm still waiting for the "real Rangers'" to win a Cup.
You are obviously entitled to your opinion, but man that's a brutal take.
the 1940 Cup is "legitimate" then? The Rangers only had two non-Canadians on the roster. I have no idea how many of them came naturally or ended up playing with somebody before, but it seems like an odd metric to use.
I don't know many people who look at the 1994 Rangers as being one that bought a cup, but maybe that was so long ago, message boards with bizarre opinions didn't exist.
The early 70's teams and the Hank teams that made the finals but didn't win the cup were more organically grown and had a different connection. But the 1994 team was much more than the NY Oilers.
Five members of that team were Rangers... unlike the Giants of 1986 who legitimately brought a SB to the team without having to go out and "buy" a SB ... the Rangers were not much more than "Edmonton lite" ... I watched... I was excited and thrilled... but it isn't as though 1994 purged the wait from 1940 by the organization finally figuring out how to build a team through the draft ... they did a great job importing a team from the outside. I'm still waiting for the "real Rangers'" to win a Cup.
This is really spectacular. You should carry insight and logic like this everywhere you go in life.
at 1994. Zubov was the leading scorer, Graves, Leetch and Kovalev were all in the Top 6. The only ex-Oiler in the group was Messier. Larmer was rounding out his career, but wasn't even with EDM.
Richter was the goalie.
Hey, it is what it is... like I said, I was obviously excited by 1994 Â
and still love Messier for what he meant to that team and the organization... and because I've been following the Rangers since the 1950s, I'm well aware of the differences between the NHL and NFL in building a team
But - the bottom line is - I enjoyed how the Giants built their team leading to the 1986 SB 1000x more than the way the Rangers built their team leading to the 1994 Cup. It felt cheap and still feels cheap.
Maybe it's just me, but to this day I feel a much stronger attachment to draft picks than I do towards imports - both Giants and Rangers.
at 1994. Zubov was the leading scorer, Graves, Leetch and Kovalev were all in the Top 6. The only ex-Oiler in the group was Messier. Larmer was rounding out his career, but wasn't even with EDM.
Richter was the goalie.
Graves was technically an ex-Oiler, although he had been a Ranger for several years at that point.
at 1994. Zubov was the leading scorer, Graves, Leetch and Kovalev were all in the Top 6. The only ex-Oiler in the group was Messier. Larmer was rounding out his career, but wasn't even with EDM.
Richter was the goalie.
I'm talking draft picks versus external imports. Graves was an import (love him obviously, but he wasn't a draft pick).
Last year they were easily a playoff team if they had even league average or slightly subpar goaltending - instead we saw them dominate the Rangers 5x5 but Darling was giving up goals high schoolers don't give up.
Is it more of the same in net for them this year? I cant believe they still suck... kind of Edmonton east at this point but at least McDavid had the one good quarterfinals Game 7 year...
Quote:
Also, Mika might have played his best game last night. He was everywhere.
Brassard looks to be on the verge of getting traded by Pittsburgh. Mixed record for Gorton so far but he absolutely nailed that trade. Timed it perfectly. Mika still only 25 and locked up for three more seasons. 41 points in 46 games now
I'm not arguing the merits of that trade, but is 41 points in 46 games good for a #1 C?
Quote:
In comment 14265370 arcarsenal said:
Quote:
Also, Mika might have played his best game last night. He was everywhere.
Brassard looks to be on the verge of getting traded by Pittsburgh. Mixed record for Gorton so far but he absolutely nailed that trade. Timed it perfectly. Mika still only 25 and locked up for three more seasons. 41 points in 46 games now
I'm not arguing the merits of that trade, but is 41 points in 46 games good for a #1 C?
Yes. What does that pace extrapolate to for a whole season? 75 points?
That's usually a top 10 - 15 center.
doesn't factor in defense which obviously is important for a C, but that's a great pace.
Of course, a better analysis would be on 5x5 scoring, etc... just saying he's a nice player, but I'd be looking to accumulate assets from one of him or Hayes this trade deadline since cost effective Centers unlike a vet expiring wing like Zuccarello ... will get us a nice haul in return.
So I think 70+ point pace is pretty good. Maybe not an upper tier 1C, but still solid. Ideally you get a true elite talent soon and Mika slots in on the second line. But you could do worse.
The debate went on for years about whether Stepan was a 1C and he never broke 60. So I'm happy with the progress shown by Zib and Kreider this season. Advanced stats on Mika are excellent as well.
Rangers haven't had a player hit 70 points since Gaborik in 2012. Just a random observation
Link - ( New Window )
NYR is not so far off.
Regardless, the Rangers have the fewest non shootout wins in the league. I like some of what they've shown offensively. Kreider and Zib have taken a step forward. And Chytil shows promise. But they are not close to contending. Hayes has given them exactly what they needed, a career year to boost his trade value. Take advantage.
You don't trade 26 year old players away like that, you build on top of them.
Andersson does not impress me at all, never did. Chytil is going to be a big time player - in the Hayes mold.
He will be a good player.
and I think he's an NHL center.
Chytil, also a good player, I think may wind up at wing.
but people expecting every NHL 1st round pick to be Auston Matthews are in for a let down.
these are 17/18 year old kids who are drafted, not 22/23 years old kids like in the NFL or NBA.
Even MLB (with similar ages for high school draftees) is pretty hit or miss in the 1st round.
It's hard to project a 17/18 year old playing against other 17/18 year old players to play against players much older and players more developed physically - a lot of projection for most of these guys.
but in the case of Andersson I think he'll be a good player.
And I'd probably trade Hayes and Zucarello if there was a good return though I can see Hayes sticking around now that he's playing like most people expected him to play.
NYR is not so far off.
They are most certainly far off and the guys you listed will soon a) require bigger cap hits and b) by the time we are hopefully ready to contend again (3 years minimum unless we draft like Boston did), they will past their primes and older/expensive.
Rebuilding is a multi year effort. It wasn't - trade Nash, Grabner,
McDonaugh and now Zuccs - and call it a day. If aren't anywhere closer to competing today than we were last year and we traded our captain then - so hopefully one of Hayes or Ziba is dealt for mutiple assets. We have plenty of centers next year anyway assuming Lias moves to a depth C slot.
I don't buy the 3 years away mantra for this Rangers team.
So what kind of contract would it cost to re-sign him in season? He would only accept a one year deal over the summer because he wanted to get to UFA as quick as possible. So there's no discount to be had here. JT Miller got 5 years and 5.2 per from Tampa. Start there but increase when factoring in Hayes being a natural center, IMO now a better player, and no Florida state income tax. 5 year and 6 million? I don't know, that may be too rich for me.
I don't buy the 3 years away mantra for this Rangers team.
No idea how far away the Rangers are, partly because Hank is 37 this year and partly because they have 1 top 4 D IMO.
but Vegas was an anomaly IMO due to the expansion draft.
almost all of their 12 forwards all capable of being 3rd line forwards or better and many had career years (Karlsson for one).
6 very solid D, all would be top 4 on most teams.
stellar goalie play
and 100% buy-in on a high press forecheck.
In many ways even though they had no super stars, it was/is easier for Vegas to contend from expansion than teams like the Rangers from blowing it up.
I'm going to leave it there...
At the moment we are wondering as aimlessly as Detroit and Philly as far as getting back to prominence. Last years sell off was a good start and maybe Zuccs was kept this summer for leadership -- but it's time to stop winning games and accumulate assets and hopefully a top 5 pick!!
But they're close. I'll leave it at that!
Let some of these kids continue to get PT and develop plus add a few high end FA players (Panarin, etc) in the off season and we are contenders with Hank.
19 wins, 27 losses
One of 8 teams in hockey (31 teams) with fewer wins than regulation losses - so not even .500 under the little league mentality of determining .500 which makes everyone feel like a winner (i.e. Participation trophy)
13 regulation wins all year against 20 regulation losses
But yes, better last 4 games. Hard to look worse than that stretch vs Pittsburgh - Colorado - Arizona
But this team needs some top tier talent. I'm content watching them rebuild so long as they are willing to pay the price (exchanging fan favorite players in return for sufficient draft value to enable them to position for truly premium draft talent)
This team has warts all over the place, I get it - but I think they have a solid foundation of players to build on now. I'm not into the whole tank thing, but I respect those that are and it's not a point to debate.
The draft is a crap shoot - I prefer to keep guy's like Hayes, Zib, Kreids...
But this team needs some top tier talent. I'm content watching them rebuild so long as they are willing to pay the price (exchanging fan favorite players in return for sufficient draft value to enable them to position for truly premium draft talent)
The problem I have with that Bill is there is no guarantee you are going to get players like Kreids and Hayes in the draft or in trade return. These guys now are in their prime years, why deal them?
Quote:
and should consider trading both Kreider, Hayes & Zucc this year because none are likely to go up in value between now and the 2020/21 season... and I hate saying that because I love all 3 players.
But this team needs some top tier talent. I'm content watching them rebuild so long as they are willing to pay the price (exchanging fan favorite players in return for sufficient draft value to enable them to position for truly premium draft talent)
The problem I have with that Bill is there is no guarantee you are going to get players like Kreids and Hayes in the draft or in trade return. These guys now are in their prime years, why deal them?
Because I want the Rangers to be at the beginning of their real upswing in the 2020/21 season with their prime assets doing nothing but growing in talent for the following 5 years... and I don't see Kreider, Hayes or Zucc meeting that definition. Kreider and Hayes will probably be at the height of their talent for the next 3 years culminating in 2020/21. I think the Rangers need talent that extends from 2020/21, not talent that falls off after 2020/21.
Well done, Bill. Couldn't have said it better myself.
The good news is unlike Buffalo, Florida and Carolina which are stuck in what seems like eternal hell... when we are ready to contend again in 3 years, we can actually recruit to build around young drafted players ... better than Hayes, Kreisler, Zibanejad and Shattenkirk for that matter... and get back quickly.
I also think it’s a fantasy to assume that we’re gong to contend in 2-3 years if we unload players like Kreider and Hayes. How long was Edmonton crap, even with all their top picks? Us having a ton of picks guarantees us nothing.
Well done, Bill. Couldn't have said it better myself.
The good news is unlike Buffalo, Florida and Carolina which are stuck in what seems like eternal hell... when we are ready to contend again in 3 years, we can actually recruit to build around young drafted players ... better than Hayes, Kreisler, Zibanejad and Shattenkirk for that matter... and get back quickly.
I've never felt otherwise. We've simply disagreed on my getting enjoyment from watching them play.
I also think it’s a fantasy to assume that we’re gong to contend in 2-3 years if we unload players like Kreider and Hayes. How long was Edmonton crap, even with all their top picks? Us having a ton of picks guarantees us nothing.
Yat. That may turn out to be true. After all, in my book the Rangers have still not won a Cup since 1940, and why would I think getting a bunch of draft picks is going to change things over the next 3 years?
But, as much as I've loved watching Kreider, I just don't see his upside being much more than what it is now. And the bottom line is the Rangers don't have a guy you build a franchise around... a LT or Barkley. I want to see them be patient and try to build through the draft... and hope they develop enough talent internally so they can finally win a Cup without having to import another team - wholesale - to do it.
I don't buy the 3 years away mantra for this Rangers team.
They also had an opportunity to build from scratch and they did a great job of sticking to a game plan.
There was an excellent article (sorry don't remember where) that in many ways this isn't Quinn's type of team.
As for Kreider, he is what he will be, a fine power forward with exceptional speed. We’d be lucky to land a kid with that talent level in the middle of the 1st round, which is essentially what a trade would yield.
The difference between us and Edmonton or Buffalo or Carolina... is when we are ready to compete again with a good young nucleus (all of the recent draft picks plus hopefully two years picking in the top 5 or at least top 10 plus picks from other teams acquired in future trades) -- the Rangers have proven they can recruit better than most if not all the other franchises.
Let’s say Tampa wins the Cup. Great, we get their #1 again, at the bottom of the round. Not a great asset.
Did the Rangers not earn the Cup in 1994?
I'm going to guess he'll say it's because they brought in a bunch of mercenaries, as if anyone but him gives a shit about that.
For all of the "NY Oilers", the Conn Smythe winner was the homegrown Brian Leetch.
Quote:
After all, in my book the Rangers have still not won a Cup since 1940
Did the Rangers not earn the Cup in 1994?
Five members of that team were Rangers... unlike the Giants of 1986 who legitimately brought a SB to the team without having to go out and "buy" a SB ... the Rangers were not much more than "Edmonton lite" ... I watched... I was excited and thrilled... but it isn't as though 1994 purged the wait from 1940 by the organization finally figuring out how to build a team through the draft ... they did a great job importing a team from the outside. I'm still waiting for the "real Rangers'" to win a Cup.
Quote:
background on this??
Quote:
After all, in my book the Rangers have still not won a Cup since 1940
Did the Rangers not earn the Cup in 1994?
Five members of that team were Rangers... unlike the Giants of 1986 who legitimately brought a SB to the team without having to go out and "buy" a SB ... the Rangers were not much more than "Edmonton lite" ... I watched... I was excited and thrilled... but it isn't as though 1994 purged the wait from 1940 by the organization finally figuring out how to build a team through the draft ... they did a great job importing a team from the outside. I'm still waiting for the "real Rangers'" to win a Cup.
You are obviously entitled to your opinion, but man that's a brutal take.
I don't know many people who look at the 1994 Rangers as being one that bought a cup, but maybe that was so long ago, message boards with bizarre opinions didn't exist.
Good Lord.
This is really spectacular. You should carry insight and logic like this everywhere you go in life.
Richter was the goalie.
But - the bottom line is - I enjoyed how the Giants built their team leading to the 1986 SB 1000x more than the way the Rangers built their team leading to the 1994 Cup. It felt cheap and still feels cheap.
Maybe it's just me, but to this day I feel a much stronger attachment to draft picks than I do towards imports - both Giants and Rangers.
Richter was the goalie.
Graves was technically an ex-Oiler, although he had been a Ranger for several years at that point.
Richter was the goalie.
I'm talking draft picks versus external imports. Graves was an import (love him obviously, but he wasn't a draft pick).
Like I said, I thoroughly enjoyed the Giants of the 1980s and their Super Bowls 1000x more than I enjoyed the Rangers of the 1990s.
That's a heck of a lot more than 5 players. There might even be a few more