After Tomas Kloucek was traded, many a Ranger fan barked
that next on the block was Jamie Lundmark.

"He was a Neil Smith pickup," they argued.

"He's the only prospect with value," they claimed.

I berated the messengers, believing that the Kloucek deal
for Dunham was a sound one that did not indicate a
prospect fire sale.

But...

John Davidson as Barometer

I like JD. I think he has a tough job of balancing honest
commentary with Cablevision corporate BS.

But there are times that you can tell when he's pushing
a corporate agenda.

It's pretty simple. If JD is lauding a prospect, then
you know Ranger management is high on the kid. And if
he criticizes a prospect, then you know at best management
is down on the kid, at worst he's trade bait.

Kloucek Case Study

JD softened the blow for Ranger fans by bringing down
Kloucek's image with criticism before the deal.

Said he didn't produce or show the coaches enough in
pre-season (never mind he was injured). Said he wasn't
consistent.

Now readers of Heather's columns know his inconsistency
was an issue - but JD's tone and comments were the
insight to his future with the team.

He could've approached the inconsistency as a glass
half-full scenario. But he chose the half-empty, and
it's no coincidence Tomas was soon out the door.

JD on Lundmark

OK, last game, JD praised Fata. Said he showed effective
grit and hustle after being benched for five games.

(I won't touch right now the implication that the benching,
and by association the coaching, had anything to do with
Fata's recent production)

But, JD immediately followed that up by saying that such
an attitude is what Jamie Lundmark needs to do in order to
be successful in the NHL.

Now, two points:

Why end a praise of an impressive prospect with a criticism
of another?

But, more importantly, why choose Lundmark to criticize?

I didn't hear JD praise Dunham and then point out how
Dan Blackburn needs to copy his positioning in order to
play consistently in the NHL.

Nor did I hear him say anything about how other perimeter
forwards like Dvorak and Samuelsson, who current average
15-16 minutes of ice time, should emulate Rico's hustle.

Now, as many seem to think, perhaps I read too much into
the minutae. It's certainly possible that JD's criticism
of Lundmark was a random stream of consciousness.

But then it happened again!

In tonight's game, JD again mentioned Rico's improved play.
Said Fata went to the coaches and told them he wanted to be
a great player in the league.

Coaches told him to focus on the details.

He then follows the story again with the same criticism of
Lundmark. That Jamie needs to be more consistent and be more
attentive to details and hustle more.

For me, coincidence went out the window. That was not a
random commentary. That was planned - both the promotion of
Rico, and the criticism of Lundmark.

Fact: Jamie's getting the MSG prospect treatment

Fine. Call me a conspiracy theorist.

But I don't buy that Sather won't make a deal to try and
salvage the season. And I think he's taking Jamie's
NY image down a notch (and concurrently Rico's up) in
order to have him as potential trade bait.

-Gabe

Recent Articles 19 Years Of Mike & The Mad Dog

Web Hockeybird.com