New York Rangers: The most important summer in team history

Since the turn of the millennium, the New York Rangers served as a model of stability for the rest of the NHL. Now, with so much of the team’s future up in the air, the fate of the franchise is murky.

Whether or not you believe the urban legend that Madison Square Garden corporation owner hired Glen Sather as President and G.M. of the New York Rangers back in 2000 based on an interaction the two had back in the 70s when Dolan was a child and Sather still a player, if nothing else, Sather projected a vision.

Sure, the Hockey Hall of Famer’s ideas about the game of hockey were antiquated and required a fine-tuning. Yet, except for the first four years on the job, Sather designed a perennial contender around goaltender Henrik Lundqvist. As a seventh-round pick that didn’t come to North America for five years, it was a stroke of luck, but so much of hockey is just that, how things bounce.

Now, with the announcement that Sather is working alongside Dolan to hire a replacement as President so he can take a reduced role in the organization, the Rangers are in uncharted waters. The team’s current general manager Jeff Gorton is in month 15 of a rebuild and is beginning to grow impatient.

The head coach that Gorton and Sather picked last summer, David Quinn, has the moxie and intangibles to lead in today’s league, but what will things be like when he’s given legitimate talent and expected to not just win, but compete?

It’s no exaggeration to say that the fate of the Rangers’ organization hinges on the decisions made this summer. Hiring the wrong president, forcing a trade, using a lottery pick on a bust, overpaying a less than marquee free agent, all on the table and recipes for derailing the progress already made.

Projecting a vision

At least coming into this season, there was a plan. The Rangers weren’t going to be very talented, but they were going to compete. After 82 regular season games, it’s safe to say that Quinn and Gorton achieved their goal of keeping games close on most nights. New York played in 41 one-goal games during the regular season.

In addition, the Rangers went to overtime 23 different times during the regular season. So, even with a weak team, there was enough structure to hang around and mask some of the team’s most pressing issues.

However, with New York missing the playoffs for the second straight year, it’s apparent that the front office is starting to get antsy. On breakup day, Gorton mentioned the need for the team to add more talent and the ways of possibly doing so.

While Gorton can’t come out and say that he’d like to back up a Brinks truck of cash to court Artemi Panarin, Erik Karlsson or even possibly reunite with Kevin Hayes come July 1st, it’s pretty obvious that’s what he’s thinking.

The Rangers have the assets to acquire NHL ready talent right now, Chris Kreider on the last year of his contract and his bounty of draft picks are plenty to make moves. But, it’s a matter of properly determining the risk associated with such a move.

Swing for the fences or shoot the gap

Like all decisions that executives make, it’s up to them to decide if the risk is worth taking a chance. For example, the Rangers swung for the fences with all three of the team’s first-round draft picks last year. Picking Vitali Kravtsov ninth overall sent social media into a tizzy, but a year later looks to have been the right choice.

However, the year prior, the Rangers selected Lias Andersson, a pick deemed a safe choice. The logic was that the Swede should be pretty close to NHL ready because of his 200-foot style of play and penchant for not taking risks. While the jury is still out on Andersson as a player since he’s only 20, that’s the difference we’re discussing.

This summer, the front office will again decide whether to play things safe or to swing for the fences. What would it do to the development of the team’s young players if either Panarin or Karlsson was brought into the fold and suddenly expected to compete for a playoff spot?

These are parts of the ripple effect that may not be considered because of their near range impact. The front office trying to make the team better right now should be commended, but if it comes at the cost of player development, what’s the point?

With so many decisions that need to be made, the next decade of Rangers hockey may be defined before the summer is even over.