Did Larry Brooks make up a story just to stick it to Glen Sather?

And he really didn’t help his cause when he did

Larry Brooks is Eklund, who somehow managed to get some level of credibility. I take his words with a grain of salt, just like I do any “columnist”. More annoying, he writes like an 8th grader.

So is there a conclusion to the story yet? It kind of just cuts off at the end.

Like did Brooks send Adrian a flaming bag of poop or something?

Great Stuff Mouth working it as only you can….

he lost alll credibility with this story..

their both idiots. brooks and sather

I don’t know what went on exactly with the Orpik situation, but one thing as a Ranger fan of 20 years I can tell you is this……..guys like Brooks Orpik don’t ever wind up on Broadway. I don’t know what it is, because there’s been what, three or four GM’s since the late 80’s? The brass changes but the philosophy of soft defensemen does not. I mean, besides Jeff Beukaboom and Ulf Samuellson, who else like Orpik has played on our blueline? We sign tons and tons of soft defensemen and the only tough ones we do sign are too slow to be effective, i.e. Rich Pilon, Jason Strudwick, Paul Mara, David Karpa, etc. In fact, the only uber-physical defenseman we acquired at a young age was Tomas Kloucek, who was well on his way to becoming my favorite player, blew out his knee and then got concussion problems. Clearly defensemen like Orpik, Chara, Pronger and Phaneuf are quite bloody necessary to championship franchises, so what the hell is wrong with the Rangers brass? I just don’t get it. If there’s ever gonna be perennial championships on Broadway they need to revamp their way of thinking and stop throwing money at guys like Redden and Roszival.

Thanks for all the comments guys.

Just wanted to post a reminder that this was not an attack on Brooks and that we are awaiting on some more emails from various people hoping to get more info.