Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 19 of 20 FirstFirst ... 917181920 LastLast
Results 271 to 285 of 287
  1. #271
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    49,492
    When did forum become a Knicks and Rangers forum?


    "You don't know how to drink. Your whole generation, you drink for the wrong reasons. My generation, we drink because it's good, because it feels better than unbuttoning your collar, because we deserve it. We drink because it's what men do."

  2. #272
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    36,231
    Quote Originally Posted by Claymation View Post
    When did forum become a Knicks and Rangers forum?
    When James Dolan's name became associated with the Mets.

  3. #273
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    1,326
    Dolan has left our beloved Rangers alone by default. Hes admitted in the past hes had zero interest in Hockey. He threw a lot of money at Sather to commandeer that ship. We were lucky Sather has found Groton. If Dolan buys the Mets we may as well move on to another team or just quit loving baseball because he will be involved and it will be worse than the Wilpons

  4. #274
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    60ft 6in away
    Posts
    13,296
    It's like slamming your head against a wall with this guy. The Rangers now magically had a great team around Lundqvist the whole time. Right. Okay. Jagr wasn't a fossil when he was in NY. Okay. Right. Let's all pretend this is true for MW's sake.

    Glen Sather was the GM because Dolan liked him. The team had one great year, but otherwise were never exceptionally, and every year they got as far as Lindqvist carried them. This isn't controversial. Ooh, they made the playoffs a lot, great. They also never won the Cup, and NOBODY thinks they underachieved. Interesting. A competent GM would have put a whole team together. A good owner would have found that GM when the other one couldn't do the job.

    But hey, meaningful games in May, right?

  5. #275
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    36,231
    Quote Originally Posted by JoeGamer81 View Post
    It's like slamming your head against a wall with this guy. The Rangers now magically had a great team around Lundqvist the whole time. Right. Okay. Jagr wasn't a fossil when he was in NY. Okay. Right. Let's all pretend this is true for MW's sake.

    Glen Sather was the GM because Dolan liked him. The team had one great year, but otherwise were never exceptionally, and every year they got as far as Lindqvist carried them. This isn't controversial. Ooh, they made the playoffs a lot, great. They also never won the Cup, and NOBODY thinks they underachieved. Interesting. A competent GM would have put a whole team together. A good owner would have found that GM when the other one couldn't do the job.

    But hey, meaningful games in May, right?
    Strawmanning from you as usual. I never said the Rangers always had a great team around Henrik but this garbage that he was the only reason they were good is ridiculous.

    Yeah really old Jagr was when he came. All of 31. Real fossil

    You want to live in a world where the team makes the playoffs 11 out of 12 years in a capped league is incompetence then you're stunningly lost. Considering the Mets have made the playoffs in consecutive years only twice in their history, I'd take that all day long.

    Hockey is not your sport btw. I would say stick to baseball but you are also the guy who says the Mets would be lucky to win 70 games in the AL so maybe not.
    Last edited by metswon69; 02-24-2020 at 11:26 AM.

  6. #276
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    49,492
    Quote Originally Posted by metswon69 View Post
    When James Dolan's name became associated with the Mets.
    And what does the Knicks and the Rangers have to do with the Mets?


    "You don't know how to drink. Your whole generation, you drink for the wrong reasons. My generation, we drink because it's good, because it feels better than unbuttoning your collar, because we deserve it. We drink because it's what men do."

  7. #277
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    49,492
    Jagr is not pertinent to the sale of the Mets.


    "You don't know how to drink. Your whole generation, you drink for the wrong reasons. My generation, we drink because it's good, because it feels better than unbuttoning your collar, because we deserve it. We drink because it's what men do."

  8. #278
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    60ft 6in away
    Posts
    13,296
    Quote Originally Posted by metswon69 View Post
    Strawmanning from you as usual. I never said the Rangers always had a great team around Henrik but this garbage that he was the only reason they were good is ridiculous.

    Yeah really old Jagr was when he came. All of 31. Real fossil

    You want to live in a world where the team makes the playoffs 11 out of 12 years in a capped league is incompetence then you're stunningly lost. Considering the Mets have made the playoffs in consecutive years only twice in their history, I'd take that all day long.

    Hockey is not your sport btw. I would say stick to baseball but you are also the guy who says the Mets would be lucky to win 70 games in the AL so maybe not.
    Those Rangers teams vastly overachieved thanks to Henrik. There would be conference finals or Stanley Cup finals without him; the teams simply were not good enough otherwise to warrant such success. Teams with generational talent tend to win Cups; Ovi was an outlier considering how great he is, and even he finally got one. That the Rangers haven't with Hank means they failed to put the pieces around him to win the damn thing. That's a failure, not a success.

    I know you wish you could win an argument against me, but you constantly choose the losing side. "James Dolan would be better than the Wilpons" is about as asinine a position as you've chosen yet, so enjoy the Chris Davis-esque streak you're on.

  9. #279
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    45,914
    Quote Originally Posted by Claymation View Post
    Jagr is not pertinent to the sale of the Mets.
    Other than perhaps when the team is sold, many of us will celebrate with a shot or two of Jager or some other similarly delightful type of cheer. But to your point, the spellings are different.

    Come on guys, time to move on.
    "Ain't got the call no more. Got a lot of sinful idears but they seem kinda sensible...."

  10. #280
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    36,231
    Quote Originally Posted by JoeGamer81 View Post
    Those Rangers teams vastly overachieved thanks to Henrik. There would be conference finals or Stanley Cup finals without him; the teams simply were not good enough otherwise to warrant such success. Teams with generational talent tend to win Cups; Ovi was an outlier considering how great he is, and even he finally got one. That the Rangers haven't with Hank means they failed to put the pieces around him to win the damn thing. That's a failure, not a success.

    I know you wish you could win an argument against me, but you constantly choose the losing side. "James Dolan would be better than the Wilpons" is about as asinine a position as you've chosen yet, so enjoy the Chris Davis-esque streak you're on.
    He didn't carry them as much as you believe he did. I love Lundqvist and he's great but he's also a product of a system where he didn't face the amount of quality scoring chances and shots other goalies did. That's the reason he only won one Vezina trophy despite being the "best goalie in the league for a decade" (he wasn't). Keep echoing the failure stuff like you know hockey. Its adorable.

    Like your stances on the Mets winning 70 games in the AL, the Mets not signing Betances, much of this stuff is laughable. Dolan would be a better owner if he's just signing the checks. He has money unlike Jeff and Fred Wilpon.
    Last edited by metswon69; 02-24-2020 at 08:37 PM.

  11. #281
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    36,231
    Quote Originally Posted by Claymation View Post
    And what does the Knicks and the Rangers have to do with the Mets?
    Just talking about how successful (or in the case of the Knicks unsuccessful) the franchises he has run have been. That will matter if he buys the Mets. Sounds like he doesnt want them as much as he wants SNY so it's probably irrelevant.

  12. #282
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    2,952
    Quote Originally Posted by Claymation View Post
    Jagr is not pertinent to the sale of the Mets.
    Yes he is.

    Jaromir Jagr played for the Rangers who are owned by James Dolan who also own the Knicks where Stephon Marbury played who played with the Nets with Gheorghe Muresan who was in Adventures of Serial Buddies with Henry Winkler who was in Night Shift with Clint Howard who was in Frost/Nixon with Kevin Bacon.

    Totally relevant.

  13. #283
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    49,492
    Quote Originally Posted by fanofclendennon View Post
    Other than perhaps when the team is sold, many of us will celebrate with a shot or two of Jager or some other similarly delightful type of cheer. But to your point, the spellings are different.

    Come on guys, time to move on.
    Well played sir..well played


    "You don't know how to drink. Your whole generation, you drink for the wrong reasons. My generation, we drink because it's good, because it feels better than unbuttoning your collar, because we deserve it. We drink because it's what men do."

  14. #284
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    34,939
    Not a Rangers forum. Thanks.

    Don't worry. He's got this.

  15. #285
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    610

Page 19 of 20 FirstFirst ... 917181920 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •