Trade Review: Tom Poti for Mike York
As the 2002 trade deadline approached, the Rangers were on the outside of the playoff picture, and desperate to find a way to get themselves to the post season. This Rangers team was deeply flawed, and outside of the FLY Line (Theo Fleury, Eric Lindros, Mike York) and Brian Leetch, there wasn’t much to be happy about with this squad. Brian Leetch was getting older, and the next best defenseman on the team was Vladimir Malakhov. The Rangers needed defensive help, and fast. In their haste, they traded a young and promising forward in Mike York and a fourth round pick (Ivan Koltsov) to Edmonton for young and promising defenseman Tom Poti and Rem Murray. When the trade was made, Rangers fans, who had grown attached to York as the first legitimate home grown scoring forward since Tony Amonte, almost mutinied.
York was coming off three good seasons in New York, where he put together a line of 58-80-138 in 230 games. He was flourishing on the FLY line, and was an exciting player to watch grow in Ranger blue. Poti, at the time of the acquisition, was in the middle of a bad year offensively, scoring just 2 goals and 25 points in the 2001-2002 season. The season prior, Poti put together a career year, with 12 goals, 20 assists and 32 points for the Oilers. Although Poti was struggling, Ranger fans were sold on the idea that Poti could become the next Brian Leetch, who’s skills were starting to fade as he got older.
Poti came to New York and quickly had a resurgence of sorts, netting 8 points in the season’s final 11 games (1-7-8). In 2002-2003, Poti had the best year of his career, putting up 48 points (11-37-48) for the abysmal Rangers. In 2003-2004, Poti’s supporting cast was even worse, and his production suffered. He still netted 10 goals, but just 14 assists, while missing 15 games due to injury. It was during this season that Poti really became the fans new whipping boy.
Things did not get much better for Poti after the lockout, as his final season with the Rangers would be marred with an under-appreciation of what Poti brought to the table. He did not produce the offensive numbers that we were promised when comparisons to Leetch were made, but he did play solid defense, and was one of the Rangers better defensive defensemen and shot blockers. In fact, Tom Poti was the team leader in shots blocked in the 2005-2006 season.
Poti then went to the Islanders for a year in 2006-2007, ironically enough the same year that York played for the Islanders (more on that below), and had the second-best year of his career, netting 44 points (6-38-44). He parlayed that into a four-year deal with Washington, where he would be a blue line mainstay for a team that grew from lottery-picks to Eastern Conference powerhouse. His role on the team was simple: provide steady defense. He excelled in that role for Washington.
As for York, he continued to produce at a 50-point clip per season for the next two seasons with the Oilers, and one more with the Islanders. In 2006-2007, York’s game disappeared, as he bounced from the Islanders to the Flyers to the Coyotes to the Blue Jackets, netting just 16 goals over the course of three seasons. York now resides on the Rochester Americans of the AHL. During his time with the Rangers, York never crossed the 30-goal, or 60-point thresholds.
At the time this deal was made, the Rangers acquired a young defenseman with a solid reputation entering his prime. To acquire such a player, something has to give, and York, a young forward who had two 50-point seasons under his belt, was that price. It is very easy to analyze deals in retrospect, but there is no denying that Poti was the better player than York. Their career paths following the trade reflect this. In a younger, faster NHL with more room to skate, York could not compete. (Before you go and call me a York hater, you should know that I was one of the many that hated this trade when it was made. I absolutely loved York, and was devastated when he was dealt.)
This trade was a case of the Rangers trying to address a problem on the blue line. Glen Sather acquired a defenseman entering his prime who he had drafted. York was the cost of doing business. Very few Ranger fans liked the deal at the time of the trade, and even fewer like the trade now. But in the end, Poti turned out to be the better NHL player.
17 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Timing
I think Poti got crushed by the fans for two reasons. 1 – He came in when the team was 4 or 5 years into the playoff drought and 2 – Leetch was on the downside and everyone thought he’d be the next one. Imagine if Sather locked him up instead of taking a shot on Redden… how different would our worlds be?
Lock him up over Redden...
I’m gonna hurl again.
I Am HockeyMan!!
"When I tap my stick like this (thump, thump, thump), put the puck on the tape, and I'll take care of things." Jaromir Jagr, for Bud Light.
As time went on,
I viewed this deal as a wash. How much longer did Yorkie stick around in the NHL, and honestly, how effective is Tom Poti as a player?
I Am HockeyMan!!
"When I tap my stick like this (thump, thump, thump), put the puck on the tape, and I'll take care of things." Jaromir Jagr, for Bud Light.
I would take Poti
over all Ranger D-men with the exceptions of Staal (obviously) and MDZ only because of his potential.
Thats really not saying much. You’re ranking Poti over the R&R sisters, Gilroy, and Girardi.
"Mes que un club"
"You're a pro or you're a noob. That's life"
by Scratch and Snif on May 24, 2010 2:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Great post. When the trade was made, I was against it. Since then, though, I think we got the better of the deal. Obviously, neither player really worked out for their respective teams. In Poti’s case, it he just wasn’t on the right team. He has developed into a solid defenseman, even though I still hate hearing his name.
I always hate to see ex-Rangers fail when they move on, and York is no exception. I remember he was really the only reason to watch those early Ranger teams of the 2000s. I’m scared that the same will happen to Petr Prucha
excellent analysis
A thoughtful article, one that makes the case that Sather won this trade too. Mike York’s fall from being a productive NHL player was precipitous, while Poti is still taking a regular shift for the Capitals—this alone indicates who the better player was.
One thing does not change, however—the fact that Tom Poti is a heartless, slow-footed, soft player who is no better than a fifth or sixth defenseman. There’s a reason why the Caps can’t get out of the second round, and Poti’s lack of physicality fits right in with their defense’s biggest weaknesses. Mike York in his best seasons with the Rangers was an inspiring player with a big heart, and that’s the reason why Ranger fans hated Poti so much. Trading a popular player can backfire on the new player acquired, and that’s what happened here.
Prole art threat.
When the trade was made, Rangers fans, who had grown attached to York as the first legitimate home grown scoring forward since Tony Amonte, almost mutinied.
And that’s part of the reason that Poti became a whipping boy…..well that and his horrendous play. Still a bit better than poke check pete or Pilon the Pylon.
Check out my pic a day for a year project-
Life Through My Lens
This is a real good article...
…on a trade that I havent given much thought to since it originally happened. I dont think its really fair to compare these players # 1 because of their position and #2 because of the lockout. You can argue that Poti is the better player just because he stuck around longer, but thats because forwards are easier to replace than defensemen. I mean heck, every time i think he is gone, Jason Strudwick pops up ona roster Even Chris Chelios at 48 got a contract, thats how tough it is to get a decent defender. So Poti still being around doesnt mean much to me…
Eventually, Poti was lost to FA, York disappeared and the 4th rounder turned out to be nobody, and all around 2006. So-No winner, no loser on this deal. None of the players played very long for the respective teams, so its a wash.
However, Rem Murray AND Marek Zidlicky were subsequently traded for Mike Dunham. You could argue that Zidlicky was the best player involved and the Rangers would have been better served keeping York, Zidlicky and the pick instead of having Poti and Dunham for a short term fix. Zidlicky is still around and he is a much better player than Poti.
imagine
….if the Rangers had kept Sergei Zubov, Mattias Norstrom, and Marek Zidlicky? They might’ve been just a little bit better during that seven-season playoff drought. Just maybe. Although that means they never would’ve signed Rich Pilon or Igor Ulanov.
Prole art threat.
by greifi griffie on May 24, 2010 8:33 PM EDT up reply actions
Don’t forget Kovalev. They coulda kept him too.
"Mes que un club"
"You're a pro or you're a noob. That's life"
by Scratch and Snif on May 24, 2010 10:53 PM EDT up reply actions
I didn't include Kovalev deliberately
because he sucks too. His second stint with the Rangers was a total embarrassment and he played his way out of town before the first trade too. The best hockey the Rangers got out of Kovalev was the playoff run in ‘94. Seasons where he was a productive player in the NHL are far outnumbered by years where he simply didn’t care enough to try.
At best, he’s a second-line talent who doesn’t come to play every night. At his worst he is an uninspiring and unwatchable turnover machine.
Prole art threat.
by greifi griffie on May 25, 2010 1:05 PM EDT up reply actions
And as the entire world – well, those who hadn’t already – has fallen in love with Ian Laperriere, remember he was in the same deal that sent Matty Norstrom to LA an brought back Kurri, McSorley and Churla – the first big wave of post-Cup mercenary mistakes.
I have a blog too! www.scottyhockey.com
Let's Go Rangers!
by Scotty Hockey on May 26, 2010 12:58 AM EDT up reply actions
Kovalev is a chump
For all his skill, and for all the hype…he NEVER lived up to his potential. Yeah, he scored 90 pts playing with Jagr and Lemieux, but anyone that can tie their skates could have done that. He was supposed to do it consistently, and didnt. To his credit he did have three 70+ point seasons on his own without those guys. If you look at his numbers, he averaged 66 points per season (including his 94 point season which skews the number a bit) . In comparison, Scott Gomez averages 67 and he isnt anything to write home about. There are a lot of “could have’s” and “should not have’s” through ranger history.
The point I made with Zidlicky was that he was traded with one of the players in the York/Poti deal, so his trade is a byproduct of the York/Poti deal. Theoretically, he would probably be our #1 defenseman right now had we not traded for Poti. :-) which doesnt say much for how I feel about our D.

by 































