quote:

Originally posted by redraider:
I don't find anything wrong with a Ranger inquiry as to a compensatory draft pick. After all, you'll never know unless you ask. However, to actually expect a positive ruling in such a matter is about as absurd as accepting the existence of the Easter Bunny, tooth fairy, or believing that the commish has it in for you because he supposedly roots for one of your competitors.

quote:

Originally posted by Lucky:

quote:

Originally posted by 4DYKSTRANAILSIT:

quote:

As soon as i saw you posted here I knew you'd be complaining about Bettman.
Cherepanov died, the Rangers lost out, it's that simple. Did the Flyers get compensated when Pelle Lindbergh died?

A few things about this paragraph:

- It's "that simple"? Really? Maybe instead of looking at this from a "simple" view, you should have looked a little deeper and done your homework regarding this and my next point: the situations are different in the context of the Rangers argument in the Cherepanov case. Lindburgh was, A) drafted by the Flyers, B) SIGNED by the Flyers, and C) PLAYED for the Flyers. Cherepanov was, A) drafted by the Rangers. That's all she wrote. If you can't tell the difference, I give a hint at the end of my post.

- Further, did your "simple" response ignore the fact that the CBA now and the CBA in 1985 when Lindbergh died ARE DIFFERENT AGREEMENTS? Or, do you SIMPLY believe that the CBA was drafted when the NHL was sanctioned in 1927 and remains in effect as is in perpetuity. Bear in mind that the argument the Rangers are making is done so in the landscape of the CURRENT CBA, not the one that existed in the Lindburgh days.

- If you are a Ranger fan, is it not obvious by now that there is a LOT to complain about with Bettman? He STILL has not uttered a word of sympathy for the tragedy that took Alexei's life. And did you see how he celebrated the opening of the continental NHL season this year? By ringing the bell at the NY Stock Exchange with two ISLANDER players in their sweaters? Does it strike you the least bit odd that the NYSE is in Manhattan, and there IS a team in Manhattan? Don't you think it would be fitting, then, for two RANGER players to join him for this?

But, then again, Bettman would find that as tasteful as me having two Islander players over for dinner.

quote:

This paragraph has nothing at all to do with the situation at hand, nothing at all, did the NHL kill Cherepanov? The negligence in this case is with Omsk and the Kontinental League, you really think the NHL should be responsible?

Your response has nothing to do with my assertion. Where did I state that the NHL should be held responsible for Cherepanov's death? Please find that and post it, OK? All I stated is that when a party suffers a loss, and there is a remedy in writing, at law or in policy in a legally binding document, where that party can be made "whole", REGARDLESS of where they receive that benefit, the aggrieved party has a right to pursue that. And although the KHL is apparently responsible for Cherepanov's death, I hardly think the KHL can award the Rangers a compensatory pick in next year's NHL draft...

unless you really are reading a version of the CBA from Bizarro World.

(HINT FROM ABOVE: the difference is, "B" and "C" never happened between the Rangers and Cherepanov).

Dykstra!! You are an intelligent fellow!! Can you honestly state that the Rangers aren't attempting to take advantage of an NHL ruling to strengthen themselves as a result of a young mans death? They are seeking their right to be WHOLE once again? COME ON NOW!!! WHOLE once again?? They have a fabulous system with plenty of goodies on their shelves. They as an organization should grieve this LOSS of a young life along with the poor boys family and move on!! Their "business" like mindset here is downright cold and bloodless. I think I have you figured out fairly well. When one of your teams or players behave in a reprehensible manner,you twist turn and spin in a desperate attempt to defend them with all your passion and love. What is my basis for this assumption you might ask? When the shoe is on the other foot you exhibit the antithesis and find no trouble at taking the first opportunity to step on the throat of the opposition. My God! If the Patriots,Islanders,Braves or Phillies ever proposed or did such a thing,you would be heard from immediately. Of course you will find a way to dispute this,but I can see right thru you,my friend.

quote:

Originally posted by 4DYKSTRANAILSIT:

quote:

Originally posted by Lucky:

quote:

Originally posted by 4DYKSTRANAILSIT:

quote:

Originally posted by kc1313:
This is just plain shameful on the Rangers behalf. "Technically he's still eligible to be drafted" Disgraceful, it's one thing to inquire about it, just in case, but to come up with a line like that is pathetic.

Why is this "shameful"? Are the Rangers not entitled to seek remedy, if one exists OR the question of one possibly exists, for a tragedy that injured their organization through no fault of their own? I cannot understand how ANY true Ranger fan cannot support their advocacy for this. I could understand if they jumped on this two days after Chere passed, but I think they were respectful enough and allowed enough time to pass before making this case.

So, in your eyes, if a party is aggrieved and suffers a loss due to the negligence/maliciousness of a third-party, the "classy" thing to do is not stand up for their rights and make an attempt to be made whole again? If a relative of yours was injured by a drunk driver, would you not feel it your right to seek legal remedy and retribution against the driver? Were the Goldman's "classless" in suing O.J. Simpson for "wrongful death" on behalf of their slain son? I certainly think they were not, rather it was their LEGAL right. That is America.

Without having read verbatim the contents of the CBA, I do not know if the Rangers have a legal right to this. It could be a gray area. Of course, if the CBA is non-specific in blocking their rights to a compensatory pick, then they should be granted it. It's sort of like if a store advertises that a 50% off sale on winter coats will end on "Tuesday", when they meant to say Tuesday 11/4/08. If you come in to the store on 11/5/08, you can make an argument that you should benefit from the sale. If they correct their ad afterwards to prevent others from taking the same advantage, fine, but they should still acquiesce and grant you the sale price. If the CBA is not thorough enough in it's language, and they want to change it afterwards, fine. In the meantime, the Rangers should be granted the compensatory pick.

I know one individual, an avid Islander fan, who would probably rather die than grant the Rangers any compensation here. Unfortunately, he is probably the individual who ultimately has the power to direct the final decision...

that individual is Gary Bettman.

Come on,Dykstra!! Can you ever be objective? This is a downright "goulish" request on the part of the Ranger brass! There was a quote that "We are not trying to capitalize on Cherepanov's death.". That is EXACTLY what they are attempting to do! The kid would have wanted it that way?? What a bizzare rationalization?? Someone here stated that when a player is drafted but doesn't develop and is chosen not to be signed,that team is entitled to a compensatory pick?? NONSENSE!!! There isn't any such rule! A glut of players who weren't signed 2 years after their drafting simply go back into the draft. Shame on all of you who are finding reasons to make this a conscience clearing act! Never have I heard of such a disgusting request from a professional sports organization! The Rangers from Sather on up should be ashamed of themselves!! Years ago the Islanders drafted a kid named Duncan McPherson on the 1st round who died in an avalanche while playing in a tournament in Switzerland. They also lost a 2nd round pick(a promising kid named Melanson)who died on his dressing room table.As mentioned,Pelle Lindbergh a great young goaltender died after crashing his Porche. Tragedies unfortunately occur and lives are lost,but NEVER have I heard a professional organization requesting a replacement!! Dykstra is aware that I am an Islanders fan. He also knows and is well aware that if they ever proposed something such as this they would feel my wrath!!

Can I BE objective?

In regards to your response here, I think the more germain question is can YOU be objective as an Islander fan commenting on a Ranger loss, when surely Islander fans would not shed a tear over such. For your information and enlightenment, if a player is drafted and does not sign with the team that drafted him by the two year period before the upcoming draft, yes, that player goes back into the draft, AND the team that failed to sign the drafted player DOES get a compensatory pick. So, given that I stated before that I have not seen the exact wording of the CBA provision relating to this, the only people who would predictably consider what the Rangers are doing to be so horrible ARE the fans of the rival Islanders, b/c anything that benefits the Rangers is far worse even than what helps their own Islanders. The Rangers have every right to make this argument and see how it flies.

And how do you know that Cherepanov would not want the Rangers to be compensated for his loss of life? Do you speak to him with an Ouija Board?

Although I am quite aware of the Dunc MacPherson situation when he perished in the skiing accident, that was under a different CBA. Was there a clause in that CBA under which the Islanders could make an argument for a compensatory pick? I do not know. If there was not, then your angst toward the Rangers here is moot. If there was, then instead of trying to discredit the Rangers here, why don't YOU be objective and criticize YOUR Islanders for not making that argument in the early '90's? Is it that the Rangers management is astute enough to inspect legal documentation and try at least to get what they may be entitled to, and the Islander organization is not?...

Is THAT what is causing your angst?

quote:

Originally posted by 4DYKSTRANAILSIT:

quote:

Originally posted by redraider:
I don't find anything wrong with a Ranger inquiry as to a compensatory draft pick. After all, you'll never know unless you ask. However, to actually expect a positive ruling in such a matter is about as absurd as accepting the existence of the Easter Bunny, tooth fairy, or believing that the commish has it in for you because he supposedly roots for one of your competitors.

I agree with your first two sentences. However, what makes you so certain that the Rangers do not have valid ground to be awarded a compensatory pick? Do you have a copy of the CBA?

Of course, note that I worded it as the Rangers "have valid ground" to be awarded the pick, as opposed to "will be" awarded the pick, b/c with a confessed Islander fan as commissioner of the NHL, I seriously doubt he will let justice prevail for the benefit of his rival...

speaking of which, what DO you think of Bettman bringing Islander players with him to open the NYSE, when not only do the Rangers (his rival) prowl Manhattan, but the Islanders have a 36 year history as an organization of denouncing Manhattan, Madison Ave., and NYC proper?

I just keep pointing out facts, and you just keep calling them absurd but offer no evidence of your own, eh?

quote:

Originally posted by Lucky:

quote:

Originally posted by 4DYKSTRANAILSIT:

quote:

Originally posted by Lucky:

quote:

Originally posted by 4DYKSTRANAILSIT:

quote:

Originally posted by kc1313:
This is just plain shameful on the Rangers behalf. "Technically he's still eligible to be drafted" Disgraceful, it's one thing to inquire about it, just in case, but to come up with a line like that is pathetic.

Why is this "shameful"? Are the Rangers not entitled to seek remedy, if one exists OR the question of one possibly exists, for a tragedy that injured their organization through no fault of their own? I cannot understand how ANY true Ranger fan cannot support their advocacy for this. I could understand if they jumped on this two days after Chere passed, but I think they were respectful enough and allowed enough time to pass before making this case.

So, in your eyes, if a party is aggrieved and suffers a loss due to the negligence/maliciousness of a third-party, the "classy" thing to do is not stand up for their rights and make an attempt to be made whole again? If a relative of yours was injured by a drunk driver, would you not feel it your right to seek legal remedy and retribution against the driver? Were the Goldman's "classless" in suing O.J. Simpson for "wrongful death" on behalf of their slain son? I certainly think they were not, rather it was their LEGAL right. That is America.

Without having read verbatim the contents of the CBA, I do not know if the Rangers have a legal right to this. It could be a gray area. Of course, if the CBA is non-specific in blocking their rights to a compensatory pick, then they should be granted it. It's sort of like if a store advertises that a 50% off sale on winter coats will end on "Tuesday", when they meant to say Tuesday 11/4/08. If you come in to the store on 11/5/08, you can make an argument that you should benefit from the sale. If they correct their ad afterwards to prevent others from taking the same advantage, fine, but they should still acquiesce and grant you the sale price. If the CBA is not thorough enough in it's language, and they want to change it afterwards, fine. In the meantime, the Rangers should be granted the compensatory pick.

I know one individual, an avid Islander fan, who would probably rather die than grant the Rangers any compensation here. Unfortunately, he is probably the individual who ultimately has the power to direct the final decision...

that individual is Gary Bettman.

Come on,Dykstra!! Can you ever be objective? This is a downright "goulish" request on the part of the Ranger brass! There was a quote that "We are not trying to capitalize on Cherepanov's death.". That is EXACTLY what they are attempting to do! The kid would have wanted it that way?? What a bizzare rationalization?? Someone here stated that when a player is drafted but doesn't develop and is chosen not to be signed,that team is entitled to a compensatory pick?? NONSENSE!!! There isn't any such rule! A glut of players who weren't signed 2 years after their drafting simply go back into the draft. Shame on all of you who are finding reasons to make this a conscience clearing act! Never have I heard of such a disgusting request from a professional sports organization! The Rangers from Sather on up should be ashamed of themselves!! Years ago the Islanders drafted a kid named Duncan McPherson on the 1st round who died in an avalanche while playing in a tournament in Switzerland. They also lost a 2nd round pick(a promising kid named Melanson)who died on his dressing room table.As mentioned,Pelle Lindbergh a great young goaltender died after crashing his Porche. Tragedies unfortunately occur and lives are lost,but NEVER have I heard a professional organization requesting a replacement!! Dykstra is aware that I am an Islanders fan. He also knows and is well aware that if they ever proposed something such as this they would feel my wrath!!

Can I BE objective?

In regards to your response here, I think the more germain question is can YOU be objective as an Islander fan commenting on a Ranger loss, when surely Islander fans would not shed a tear over such. For your information and enlightenment, if a player is drafted and does not sign with the team that drafted him by the two year period before the upcoming draft, yes, that player goes back into the draft, AND the team that failed to sign the drafted player DOES get a compensatory pick. So, given that I stated before that I have not seen the exact wording of the CBA provision relating to this, the only people who would predictably consider what the Rangers are doing to be so horrible ARE the fans of the rival Islanders, b/c anything that benefits the Rangers is far worse even than what helps their own Islanders. The Rangers have every right to make this argument and see how it flies.

And how do you know that Cherepanov would not want the Rangers to be compensated for his loss of life? Do you speak to him with an Ouija Board?

Although I am quite aware of the Dunc MacPherson situation when he perished in the skiing accident, that was under a different CBA. Was there a clause in that CBA under which the Islanders could make an argument for a compensatory pick? I do not know. If there was not, then your angst toward the Rangers here is moot. If there was, then instead of trying to discredit the Rangers here, why don't YOU be objective and criticize YOUR Islanders for not making that argument in the early '90's? Is it that the Rangers management is astute enough to inspect legal documentation and try at least to get what they may be entitled to, and the Islander organization is not?...

Is THAT what is causing your angst?

Angst?? The only angst I have in this case is this young life being cut short!! When stated this in a most sincere and respectful manner I was the classiest guy on the face of the Earth according to you. Now that I take exception to what I perceive as a cold lack of respect for the dead,desiring a replacement for a now useless PART, it is because I am an Islanders fan? Please!!!! Unlike my friend Red Raider,I think there is something very wrong with this mindset! I find it GOULISH!!!! Undoubtedly so will the Commissioner! Islander fan?? Nonsense!! The guy is and always will be a basketball guy who still is reading the "Hockey Book For Dummies."

quote:

Originally posted by 4DYKSTRANAILSIT:

quote:

Originally posted by Lucky:

quote:

Originally posted by 4DYKSTRANAILSIT:

quote:

As soon as i saw you posted here I knew you'd be complaining about Bettman.
Cherepanov died, the Rangers lost out, it's that simple. Did the Flyers get compensated when Pelle Lindbergh died?

A few things about this paragraph:

- It's "that simple"? Really? Maybe instead of looking at this from a "simple" view, you should have looked a little deeper and done your homework regarding this and my next point: the situations are different in the context of the Rangers argument in the Cherepanov case. Lindburgh was, A) drafted by the Flyers, B) SIGNED by the Flyers, and C) PLAYED for the Flyers. Cherepanov was, A) drafted by the Rangers. That's all she wrote. If you can't tell the difference, I give a hint at the end of my post.

- Further, did your "simple" response ignore the fact that the CBA now and the CBA in 1985 when Lindbergh died ARE DIFFERENT AGREEMENTS? Or, do you SIMPLY believe that the CBA was drafted when the NHL was sanctioned in 1927 and remains in effect as is in perpetuity. Bear in mind that the argument the Rangers are making is done so in the landscape of the CURRENT CBA, not the one that existed in the Lindburgh days.

- If you are a Ranger fan, is it not obvious by now that there is a LOT to complain about with Bettman? He STILL has not uttered a word of sympathy for the tragedy that took Alexei's life. And did you see how he celebrated the opening of the continental NHL season this year? By ringing the bell at the NY Stock Exchange with two ISLANDER players in their sweaters? Does it strike you the least bit odd that the NYSE is in Manhattan, and there IS a team in Manhattan? Don't you think it would be fitting, then, for two RANGER players to join him for this?

But, then again, Bettman would find that as tasteful as me having two Islander players over for dinner.

quote:

This paragraph has nothing at all to do with the situation at hand, nothing at all, did the NHL kill Cherepanov? The negligence in this case is with Omsk and the Kontinental League, you really think the NHL should be responsible?

Your response has nothing to do with my assertion. Where did I state that the NHL should be held responsible for Cherepanov's death? Please find that and post it, OK? All I stated is that when a party suffers a loss, and there is a remedy in writing, at law or in policy in a legally binding document, where that party can be made "whole", REGARDLESS of where they receive that benefit, the aggrieved party has a right to pursue that. And although the KHL is apparently responsible for Cherepanov's death, I hardly think the KHL can award the Rangers a compensatory pick in next year's NHL draft...

unless you really are reading a version of the CBA from Bizarro World.

(HINT FROM ABOVE: the difference is, "B" and "C" never happened between the Rangers and Cherepanov).

Dykstra!! You are an intelligent fellow!! Can you honestly state that the Rangers aren't attempting to take advantage of an NHL ruling to strengthen themselves as a result of a young mans death? They are seeking their right to be WHOLE once again? COME ON NOW!!! WHOLE once again?? They have a fabulous system with plenty of goodies on their shelves. They as an organization should grieve this LOSS of a young life along with the poor boys family and move on!! Their "business" like mindset here is downright cold and bloodless. I think I have you figured out fairly well. When one of your teams or players behave in a reprehensible manner,you twist turn and spin in a desperate attempt to defend them with all your passion and love. What is my basis for this assumption you might ask? When the shoe is on the other foot you exhibit the antithesis and find no trouble at taking the first opportunity to step on the throat of the opposition. My God! If the Patriots,Islanders,Braves or Phillies ever proposed or did such a thing,you would be heard from immediately. Of course you will find a way to dispute this,but I can see right thru you,my friend.

You know what's pretty interesting, Lucky? I've noted your criticisms of the Phillies behaviour after they won the WS, and you sound an awful lot like what you accuse me of doing when a "rival" wins? Are you beginning to understand that it's not a "rival's" success that fuels my angst toward certain teams, but in fact it is how they comport themselves? Are you perhaps beginning to understand where I'm coming from?

The Rangers have acted in a classy and appropriate manner in this. They allowed a month or so to pass before making this request. I could understand the critics if two days after Cherepanov's passing they started chirping about getting compensation, but face reality, they did NOT do it that way. They let the dust settle, then inspected the CBA, and chose to raise a question whereupon they may be, yes, MADE WHOLE for an act that was not their fault, but that they were injured by as an organization.

And when you word it is "the Rangers are attempting to take advantage of an NHL ruling to strengthen themselves as a result of a young man's death", you need to consider the following facts:

1- Strengthen themselves? Correct me if I've been in a cave the last two months, but a 1st round draft pick of theirs passed away tragically through no fault of their organization. Does that not constitute a LOSS? Couple that with what they are asking for: a SECOND ROUND pick slotted in next year's draft. To recap: through a tragic event, the Rangers LOST a FIRST round pick, and are asking for a SECOND round pick to make up for it. What they are, in fact, asking for is LESS value than what they lost, so put a hold on painting your rival as the bad guys here.

2- So you have me figured out, then when exactly can you cite where I felt another team that I do not root for should be denied compensation for an equivalent event? Frankly, if such a team raised the issue, my position would be that they have every right to. I wouldn't WANT a rival to benefit, but the difference here is that I recognize that rival's RIGHT to benefit if the landscape exists. Apparently, YOU as an Islander fan, have quite an issue with the Rangers receiving compensation for this tragic event which was not of their doing.

3- Sports IS a business. Like it or not, that is reality. Given that the Rangers allowed a waiting period, there is nothing wrong with the question they are raising, save for the seeming envy from Islander fans that the Rangers actually think about these things.

quote:

Originally posted by redraider:

quote:

Originally posted by 4DYKSTRANAILSIT:

quote:

Originally posted by redraider:
I don't find anything wrong with a Ranger inquiry as to a compensatory draft pick. After all, you'll never know unless you ask. However, to actually expect a positive ruling in such a matter is about as absurd as accepting the existence of the Easter Bunny, tooth fairy, or believing that the commish has it in for you because he supposedly roots for one of your competitors.

I agree with your first two sentences. However, what makes you so certain that the Rangers do not have valid ground to be awarded a compensatory pick? Do you have a copy of the CBA?

Of course, note that I worded it as the Rangers "have valid ground" to be awarded the pick, as opposed to "will be" awarded the pick, b/c with a confessed Islander fan as commissioner of the NHL, I seriously doubt he will let justice prevail for the benefit of his rival...

speaking of which, what DO you think of Bettman bringing Islander players with him to open the NYSE, when not only do the Rangers (his rival) prowl Manhattan, but the Islanders have a 36 year history as an organization of denouncing Manhattan, Madison Ave., and NYC proper?

I just keep pointing out facts, and you just keep calling them absurd but offer no evidence of your own, eh?

Gee Dykstra, maybe Bettman bringing two Isles to the stock exchange was a way of getting a team with little or no media coverage some sort of recognition. Heaven knows the local print media doesn't. Maybe I should cry conspiracy or agenda there, huh.

btw You recite facts and then twist it to make your own conclusions. Fact: A call was missed on a Penquin in the playoffs. Fact: The referee in question was allowed to call the final round. YOUR CONCLUSION: The referee was REWARDED for shafting the Rangers. Geez, I know the Met season is done and as such, you will shift gears from your "the media made us lose" to the more seasonal "Bettman made us lose" rant but please, your rationale in some of these matters is wearing thin.

btw Your continuous assumption that people like Lucky and myself can hardly be objective since we're Islander fans and as such hate the Rangers is ludicrous and very self serving. If you know anything about me you know damn well that I can and have taken my own teams to task when I bloody well think they're wrong. It is you who lacks the objectivity and it shows when you berate your fellow fans for not supporting the Ranger teams view on this conpensation matter solely because you feel they should support their team, irregardless.

Well I'd like to stick around for this one but I gotta go help the missus take care of the elderly. Peace!!

quote:

Originally posted by Lucky:

quote:

Originally posted by 4DYKSTRANAILSIT:

quote:

Originally posted by Lucky:

quote:

Originally posted by 4DYKSTRANAILSIT:

quote:

As soon as i saw you posted here I knew you'd be complaining about Bettman.
Cherepanov died, the Rangers lost out, it's that simple. Did the Flyers get compensated when Pelle Lindbergh died?

A few things about this paragraph:

- It's "that simple"? Really? Maybe instead of looking at this from a "simple" view, you should have looked a little deeper and done your homework regarding this and my next point: the situations are different in the context of the Rangers argument in the Cherepanov case. Lindburgh was, A) drafted by the Flyers, B) SIGNED by the Flyers, and C) PLAYED for the Flyers. Cherepanov was, A) drafted by the Rangers. That's all she wrote. If you can't tell the difference, I give a hint at the end of my post.

- Further, did your "simple" response ignore the fact that the CBA now and the CBA in 1985 when Lindbergh died ARE DIFFERENT AGREEMENTS? Or, do you SIMPLY believe that the CBA was drafted when the NHL was sanctioned in 1927 and remains in effect as is in perpetuity. Bear in mind that the argument the Rangers are making is done so in the landscape of the CURRENT CBA, not the one that existed in the Lindburgh days.

- If you are a Ranger fan, is it not obvious by now that there is a LOT to complain about with Bettman? He STILL has not uttered a word of sympathy for the tragedy that took Alexei's life. And did you see how he celebrated the opening of the continental NHL season this year? By ringing the bell at the NY Stock Exchange with two ISLANDER players in their sweaters? Does it strike you the least bit odd that the NYSE is in Manhattan, and there IS a team in Manhattan? Don't you think it would be fitting, then, for two RANGER players to join him for this?

But, then again, Bettman would find that as tasteful as me having two Islander players over for dinner.

quote:

This paragraph has nothing at all to do with the situation at hand, nothing at all, did the NHL kill Cherepanov? The negligence in this case is with Omsk and the Kontinental League, you really think the NHL should be responsible?

Your response has nothing to do with my assertion. Where did I state that the NHL should be held responsible for Cherepanov's death? Please find that and post it, OK? All I stated is that when a party suffers a loss, and there is a remedy in writing, at law or in policy in a legally binding document, where that party can be made "whole", REGARDLESS of where they receive that benefit, the aggrieved party has a right to pursue that. And although the KHL is apparently responsible for Cherepanov's death, I hardly think the KHL can award the Rangers a compensatory pick in next year's NHL draft...

unless you really are reading a version of the CBA from Bizarro World.

(HINT FROM ABOVE: the difference is, "B" and "C" never happened between the Rangers and Cherepanov).

Dykstra!! You are an intelligent fellow!! Can you honestly state that the Rangers aren't attempting to take advantage of an NHL ruling to strengthen themselves as a result of a young mans death? They are seeking their right to be WHOLE once again? COME ON NOW!!! WHOLE once again?? They have a fabulous system with plenty of goodies on their shelves. They as an organization should grieve this LOSS of a young life along with the poor boys family and move on!! Their "business" like mindset here is downright cold and bloodless. I think I have you figured out fairly well. When one of your teams or players behave in a reprehensible manner,you twist turn and spin in a desperate attempt to defend them with all your passion and love. What is my basis for this assumption you might ask? When the shoe is on the other foot you exhibit the antithesis and find no trouble at taking the first opportunity to step on the throat of the opposition. My God! If the Patriots,Islanders,Braves or Phillies ever proposed or did such a thing,you would be heard from immediately. Of course you will find a way to dispute this,but I can see right thru you,my friend.

You know what's pretty interesting, Lucky? I've noted your criticisms of the Phillies behaviour after they won the WS, and you sound an awful lot like what you accuse me of doing when a "rival" wins? Are you beginning to understand that it's not a "rival's" success that fuels my angst toward certain teams, but in fact it is how they comport themselves? Are you perhaps beginning to understand where I'm coming from?

The Rangers have acted in a classy and appropriate manner in this. They allowed a month or so to pass before making this request. I could understand the critics if two days after Cherepanov's passing they started chirping about getting compensation, but face reality, they did NOT do it that way. They let the dust settle, then inspected the CBA, and chose to raise a question whereupon they may be, yes, MADE WHOLE for an act that was not their fault, but that they were injured by as an organization.

And when you word it is "the Rangers are attempting to take advantage of an NHL ruling to strengthen themselves as a result of a young man's death", you need to consider the following facts:

1- Strengthen themselves? Correct me if I've been in a cave the last two months, but a 1st round draft pick of theirs passed away tragically through no fault of their organization. Does that not constitute a LOSS? Couple that with what they are asking for: a SECOND ROUND pick slotted in next year's draft. To recap: through a tragic event, the Rangers LOST a FIRST round pick, and are asking for a SECOND round pick to make up for it. What they are, in fact, asking for is LESS value than what they lost, so put a hold on painting your rival as the bad guys here.

2- So you have me figured out, then when exactly can you cite where I felt another team that I do not root for should be denied compensation for an equivalent event? Frankly, if such a team raised the issue, my position would be that they have every right to. I wouldn't WANT a rival to benefit, but the difference here is that I recognize that rival's RIGHT to benefit if the landscape exists. Apparently, YOU as an Islander fan, have quite an issue with the Rangers receiving compensation for this tragic event which was not of their doing.

3- Sports IS a business. Like it or not, that is reality. Given that the Rangers allowed a waiting period, there is nothing wrong with the question they are raising, save for the seeming envy from Islander fans that the Rangers actually think about these things.

There is no inconsistency or anything interesting about my take on Rollins and Phillies family acknowledgement of the Mets. Never did I criticize them as being poor sports,simply possibly stupidly obcessed with the spectre of the competition they must face in the future. I clearly stated that I wasn't disturbed in the least with their behavior,but rather flattered they would include the Mets in their glorious festive day,or did you forget this? Sports is a "business" when it suits your purposes. Again,you can bet if it one of your HATED(And I mean hated)organizations they would be GIVING THE BUSINESS!

quote:

Originally posted by 4DYKSTRANAILSIT:

quote:

Originally posted by redraider:

quote:

Originally posted by 4DYKSTRANAILSIT:

quote:

Originally posted by redraider:
I don't find anything wrong with a Ranger inquiry as to a compensatory draft pick. After all, you'll never know unless you ask. However, to actually expect a positive ruling in such a matter is about as absurd as accepting the existence of the Easter Bunny, tooth fairy, or believing that the commish has it in for you because he supposedly roots for one of your competitors.

I agree with your first two sentences. However, what makes you so certain that the Rangers do not have valid ground to be awarded a compensatory pick? Do you have a copy of the CBA?

Of course, note that I worded it as the Rangers "have valid ground" to be awarded the pick, as opposed to "will be" awarded the pick, b/c with a confessed Islander fan as commissioner of the NHL, I seriously doubt he will let justice prevail for the benefit of his rival...

speaking of which, what DO you think of Bettman bringing Islander players with him to open the NYSE, when not only do the Rangers (his rival) prowl Manhattan, but the Islanders have a 36 year history as an organization of denouncing Manhattan, Madison Ave., and NYC proper?

I just keep pointing out facts, and you just keep calling them absurd but offer no evidence of your own, eh?

Gee Dykstra, maybe Bettman bringing two Isles to the stock exchange was a way of getting a team with little or no media coverage some sort of recognition. Heaven knows the local print media doesn't. Maybe I should cry conspiracy or agenda there, huh.

btw You recite facts and then twist it to make your own conclusions. Fact: A call was missed on a Penquin in the playoffs. Fact: The referee in question was allowed to call the final round. YOUR CONCLUSION: The referee was REWARDED for shafting the Rangers. Geez, I know the Met season is done and as such, you will shift gears from your "the media made us lose" to the more seasonal "Bettman made us lose" rant but please, your rationale in some of these matters is wearing thin.

btw Your continuous assumption that people like Lucky and myself can hardly be objective since we're Islander fans and as such hate the Rangers is ludicrous and very self serving. If you know anything about me you know damn well that I can and have taken my own teams to task when I bloody well think they're wrong. It is you who lacks the objectivity and it shows when you berate your fellow fans for not supporting the Ranger teams view on this conpensation matter solely because you feel they should support their team, irregardless.

Well I'd like to stick around for this one but I gotta go help the missus take care of the elderly. Peace!!

First, as far as helping out a "poor li'l ol' team that can't get any media coverage", I once again point out the obvious: maybe your Islanders should not have been so smug from day one about Madison Ave. and NYC. Hey, they thumbed their nose at the powers that COULD have promoted them, so now they cannot cry and whine that nobody pays attention to them. You make your bed, you sleep in it.

So let me get this straight: you're accusing me of a lack of objectivity when it comes to my own teams, yet you cannot grasp the obvious, that if the NHL wants to gain any publicity in the market, and they intend to do so by ringing the opening bell at the NYSE in MANHATTAN, the obvious choice to attend is Ranger representatives? In fact, I would even accept an argument that Bettman should have had four players on the podium: one Ranger, one Islander, one Devil, and one Sabre. But no, the commish chose two guys from the team he has ADMITTED WITH HIS OWN WORDS, he roots for. If you cannot find that curious, you need to quell the accusations of bias you cast upon me, for they only boomberang back.

I do recognize that you can be critical of your teams, but you conveniently ignore when I am. Have you not noticed my rants about the Ranger PP unit? Did you not note that, in a Ranger game against the Bruins last year when Shanahan was awarded a penalty shot on an "iffy" call, I was one of the few Ranger fans on this Board who debated my brethren that the call never should have been made? Some Ranger fans even criticized me for that, but I stuck to my guns, b/c that's the way I saw it. I'm afraid that your accusations of my "lack of objectivity" may just be a convenient way of skirting the points that I'm bringing up, and trying to push them aside rather than confront them.

And to correct something here: my points regarding the Rangers and Bettman was NEVER of the ilk "Bettman made us lose". My only contention has been that a commissioner who has publicly admitted he is and Islander fan has created a workplace enviornment where officals are rewarded for being unfair to the Rangers, and Joanette's privilege of working the Cup Finals last year is concrete proof of that postulate...

a lot more concrete than you have offered to dispute the assertion.

quote:

Originally posted by 4DYKSTRANAILSIT:

quote:

Originally posted by Lucky:

quote:

Originally posted by 4DYKSTRANAILSIT:

quote:

Originally posted by Lucky:

quote:

Originally posted by 4DYKSTRANAILSIT:

quote:

As soon as i saw you posted here I knew you'd be complaining about Bettman.
Cherepanov died, the Rangers lost out, it's that simple. Did the Flyers get compensated when Pelle Lindbergh died?

A few things about this paragraph:

- It's "that simple"? Really? Maybe instead of looking at this from a "simple" view, you should have looked a little deeper and done your homework regarding this and my next point: the situations are different in the context of the Rangers argument in the Cherepanov case. Lindburgh was, A) drafted by the Flyers, B) SIGNED by the Flyers, and C) PLAYED for the Flyers. Cherepanov was, A) drafted by the Rangers. That's all she wrote. If you can't tell the difference, I give a hint at the end of my post.

- Further, did your "simple" response ignore the fact that the CBA now and the CBA in 1985 when Lindbergh died ARE DIFFERENT AGREEMENTS? Or, do you SIMPLY believe that the CBA was drafted when the NHL was sanctioned in 1927 and remains in effect as is in perpetuity. Bear in mind that the argument the Rangers are making is done so in the landscape of the CURRENT CBA, not the one that existed in the Lindburgh days.

- If you are a Ranger fan, is it not obvious by now that there is a LOT to complain about with Bettman? He STILL has not uttered a word of sympathy for the tragedy that took Alexei's life. And did you see how he celebrated the opening of the continental NHL season this year? By ringing the bell at the NY Stock Exchange with two ISLANDER players in their sweaters? Does it strike you the least bit odd that the NYSE is in Manhattan, and there IS a team in Manhattan? Don't you think it would be fitting, then, for two RANGER players to join him for this?

But, then again, Bettman would find that as tasteful as me having two Islander players over for dinner.

quote:

This paragraph has nothing at all to do with the situation at hand, nothing at all, did the NHL kill Cherepanov? The negligence in this case is with Omsk and the Kontinental League, you really think the NHL should be responsible?

Your response has nothing to do with my assertion. Where did I state that the NHL should be held responsible for Cherepanov's death? Please find that and post it, OK? All I stated is that when a party suffers a loss, and there is a remedy in writing, at law or in policy in a legally binding document, where that party can be made "whole", REGARDLESS of where they receive that benefit, the aggrieved party has a right to pursue that. And although the KHL is apparently responsible for Cherepanov's death, I hardly think the KHL can award the Rangers a compensatory pick in next year's NHL draft...

unless you really are reading a version of the CBA from Bizarro World.

(HINT FROM ABOVE: the difference is, "B" and "C" never happened between the Rangers and Cherepanov).

Dykstra!! You are an intelligent fellow!! Can you honestly state that the Rangers aren't attempting to take advantage of an NHL ruling to strengthen themselves as a result of a young mans death? They are seeking their right to be WHOLE once again? COME ON NOW!!! WHOLE once again?? They have a fabulous system with plenty of goodies on their shelves. They as an organization should grieve this LOSS of a young life along with the poor boys family and move on!! Their "business" like mindset here is downright cold and bloodless. I think I have you figured out fairly well. When one of your teams or players behave in a reprehensible manner,you twist turn and spin in a desperate attempt to defend them with all your passion and love. What is my basis for this assumption you might ask? When the shoe is on the other foot you exhibit the antithesis and find no trouble at taking the first opportunity to step on the throat of the opposition. My God! If the Patriots,Islanders,Braves or Phillies ever proposed or did such a thing,you would be heard from immediately. Of course you will find a way to dispute this,but I can see right thru you,my friend.

You know what's pretty interesting, Lucky? I've noted your criticisms of the Phillies behaviour after they won the WS, and you sound an awful lot like what you accuse me of doing when a "rival" wins? Are you beginning to understand that it's not a "rival's" success that fuels my angst toward certain teams, but in fact it is how they comport themselves? Are you perhaps beginning to understand where I'm coming from?

The Rangers have acted in a classy and appropriate manner in this. They allowed a month or so to pass before making this request. I could understand the critics if two days after Cherepanov's passing they started chirping about getting compensation, but face reality, they did NOT do it that way. They let the dust settle, then inspected the CBA, and chose to raise a question whereupon they may be, yes, MADE WHOLE for an act that was not their fault, but that they were injured by as an organization.

And when you word it is "the Rangers are attempting to take advantage of an NHL ruling to strengthen themselves as a result of a young man's death", you need to consider the following facts:

1- Strengthen themselves? Correct me if I've been in a cave the last two months, but a 1st round draft pick of theirs passed away tragically through no fault of their organization. Does that not constitute a LOSS? Couple that with what they are asking for: a SECOND ROUND pick slotted in next year's draft. To recap: through a tragic event, the Rangers LOST a FIRST round pick, and are asking for a SECOND round pick to make up for it. What they are, in fact, asking for is LESS value than what they lost, so put a hold on painting your rival as the bad guys here.

2- So you have me figured out, then when exactly can you cite where I felt another team that I do not root for should be denied compensation for an equivalent event? Frankly, if such a team raised the issue, my position would be that they have every right to. I wouldn't WANT a rival to benefit, but the difference here is that I recognize that rival's RIGHT to benefit if the landscape exists. Apparently, YOU as an Islander fan, have quite an issue with the Rangers receiving compensation for this tragic event which was not of their doing.

3- Sports IS a business. Like it or not, that is reality. Given that the Rangers allowed a waiting period, there is nothing wrong with the question they are raising, save for the seeming envy from Islander fans that the Rangers actually think about these things.

There is no inconsistency or anything interesting about my take on Rollins and Phillies family acknowledgement of the Mets. Never did I criticize them as being poor sports,simply possibly stupidly obcessed with the spectre of the competition they must face in the future. I clearly stated that I wasn't disturbed in the least with their behavior,but rather flattered they would include the Mets in their glorious festive day,or did you forget this? Sports is a "business" when it suits your purposes. Again,you can bet if it one of your HATED(And I mean hated)organizations they would be GIVING THE BUSINESS!

I understand that you have acknowledged that the Phillies are "flattering" the Mets by their obssessive comments after winning the WS, but you have certainly not held them in the highest of esteem for those comments. Certainly not in the high esteem with which you defended the NE Patriots against my assertions... which we