Post-Game Talk: #26 - 03/13/2021 | Rangers @ Bruins | 1:00 PM EST - NHLN, MSG+

[Peltz]

how many 1st and 2nd overall picks ever spend time in the AHL? the fact that they would be on such a list is enough to be alarming. let alone the fact that Laf is one of the best 1st overall in the last 10 years and Kakko was by far the most NHL ready player in his draft. did the entire hockey world just get it wrong then?

I think people are just quickly jumping to conclusions in general. Not every player is the same and not every organization is the same.

Most other teams that pick first have a lot less talent in the lineup and aren’t forcing a 2 way game on their top pick while slotting them into the 3rd line.

Those aren’t excuses - the kids should be scoring more. But not every player has the same development path.

If you watch the games though, it’s clear these two guys have a high upside. And there’s nothing here that screams “red flag” that they’re not going to grow into great offensive assets.

It would be one thing if they looked completely incompetent or invisible out there. But that’s not the case at all. Not being on the scoresheet at this stage is not enough for me to worry.

 

[Larrybiv]

One thing about Smitty...he always tries ...lots of extra effort. He does not always win his battles for the puck....but he certainly does give his all .

He has more heart than half the team. Easy to root for, sans his stupidity sometimes.

 

[NYRKING30]

Yeah, like when PP1 controls the puck for 1:30 in the offensive zone but no - they need to exit and go to the bench to let PP2 extra 15 seconds. ‍

I’m not talking about when they have zone control. How many times have they haven’t even been able to get set up and they are still out there? Quite a few.

 

[kovazub94]

I’m not talking about when they have zone control. How many times have they haven’t even been able to get set up and they are still out there? Quite a few.

Nope, if they can’t set in a minute - they’re off the ice to let PP2 do the same (I don’t know if you noticed but PP2 is so much worse at that).

 

[NYRKING30]

Nope, if they can’t set in a minute - they’re off the ice to let PP2 do the same (I don’t know if you noticed but PP2 is so much worse at that).

The point is to give the kids more pp time. How much time did Chytil have on the pp yesterday?

 

[kovazub94]

The point is to give the kids more pp time. How much time did Chytil have on the pp yesterday?

How Effective Chytil has been on PP? And let’s not forget that he’s a center who at the moment can’t take faceoffs, let alone win one.

 

[Larrybiv]

Creativity definitely is a problem and has been for them long before this season . Lack of talented C's likely the cause of that and cement hands on the wings but that should get better with Laf/KK and Kravs hopefully...and Panarin of course when he is with the club.

This is such an inpactful word. Yes, they do lack creativity, more specifically on the PP. In a "short part" of the rink with limited space, one would think that the MORE MOVEMENT & switching along with net front presence (mostly Kreider) you would think that would cause confusion. Making opposing players turn their backs because we have it behind the goal line should cause players NOT knowing who to cover.
There is not ANY of that. Too stagnant, which makes it easier to cover and whats worse.....is they KNOW who to defend and what our PP is trying to do.
I have a few suggestions.

1. How about putting the puck on net.
2. Not missing yawning nets
3. Missing the net purposely as to not getting it blocked and retrieve off the boards as a set play.
4. Score once or twice out of every 5 chances. Haha.

Otherwise its the same ole, same ole.

 

[NYRKING30]

How Effective Chytil has been on PP? And let’s not forget that he’s a center who at the moment can’t take faceoffs, let alone win one.

How effective has anyone been on the pp? True about the faceoffs, if there’s no whistle they should be able to get out there a bit more. Hopefully sometime in the near future he’s able to take the draws.

 

[Machinehead]

Please show me a team doing creative offense without top creative players making them?

A good outside example - it’s funny how all of the sudden Minnesota became a must watch hockey with addition of Kaprisov.

Over 82 games, Panarin is on pace for 103 points and Kreider is on pace for 44 goals. Fox is close to a 50-point pace. Strome hasn't missed a beat and Buchnevich is almost a PPG player. It's just Zibanehad.

How long are we going to keep using that as an excuse for our young players being 4th liners?

The vets are fine.

 

[Fitzy]

Over 82 games, Panarin is on pace for 103 points and Kreider is on pace for 44 goals. Fox is close to a 50-point pace. Strome hasn't missed a beat and Buchnevich is almost a PPG player. It's just Zibanehad.

How long are we going to keep using that as an excuse for our young players being 4th liners?

The vets are fine.

Well, it's not 'the young players', it's Kakko and Lafreniere.

Miller and Chytil look pretty good.

 

[Machinehead]

Well, it's not 'the young players', it's Kakko and Lafreniere.

Miller and Chytil look pretty good.

Right, it's Kakko and Lafreniere.

It's two years in a row an out-of-the-box NHL player forgot how to play hockey and Kakko still can't score.

I don't think it's a radical idea at all that we start asking if something is wrong with the environment. Frankly, I think it's a more positive outlook. I'd much rather think "gee, maybe the Rangers need to do something different" than think these guys are historically bad rookies because that's just what they are.

 

[aufheben]

I don't think it's a radical idea at all that we start asking if something is wrong with the environment. Frankly, I think it's a more positive outlook.

Positive outlook or wishful thinking?

I'd much rather think "gee, maybe the Rangers need to do something different" than think these guys are historically bad rookies because that's just what they are.

Exactly.

Trust me, I hope you guys are right. But the more pleasant theory does not necessarily = the more logical theory.

 

[Machinehead]

Positive outlook or wishful thinking?

Exactly.

This seems doom and gloom to me.

We get back to back top 2 picks and they just suck because the Rangers are cursed?

I don't accept that. Maybe it's not Quinn specifically but I don't accept that this franchise just has black magic that can't be fixed or explained.

Any way you slice it, yes, it's the most Rangers thing ever and we did a rebuild to identify why this happens and stop it, not just sit on our hands and say "lol rongos" until we all die.

 

[aufheben]

This seems doom and gloom to me.

We get back to back top 2 picks and they just suck because the Rangers are cursed?

I don't accept that. Maybe it's not Quinn specifically but I don't accept that this franchise just has black magic that can't be fixed or explained.

Any way you slice it, yes, it's the most Rangers thing ever and we did a rebuild to identify why this happens and stop it, not just sit on our hands and say "lol rongos" until we all die.

It’s only “doom and gloom” if you think Kakko and Lafreniere are finished products, which I don’t. To the contrary, I think both of them are absurdly talented, and IMO putting their struggles on things like systems and coaching downplays their talent.

The kid drafted right after Lafreniere has not even played in the NHL yet.

 

[Machinehead]

It’s only “doom and gloom” if you think Kakko and Lafreniere are finished products, which I don’t. To the contrary, I think both of them are absurdly talented, and IMO putting their struggles on things like systems and coaching downplays their talent.

The kid drafted right after Lafreniere has not even played in the NHL yet.

Nobody has said they're finished products but their development has slowed since they got here. That's a fact. Anybody who says they're not disappointed is lying to you and themselves.

It's literally the job of those running the team to get to the bottom of that.

 

[aufheben]

Nobody has said they're finished products but their development has slowed since they got here. That's a fact. Anybody who says they're not disappointed is lying to you and themselves.

It's literally the job of those running the team to get to the bottom of that.

Kakko looks vastly improved and Lafreniere hasn’t played more than one season.

I’m disappointed too but you guys are taking the easy way out “getting to the bottom” of things. You just said yourself that you guys are going with the theory that is the easiest and most pleasant.

Luck, sample size, randomness; Kakko played non-stop hockey his rookie year, and the exact opposite happened to Lafreniere; Maybe their styles of play take time; Maybe if Zibanejad didn’t forget how to score Lafreniere would have twice as many points; COVID-19; Maybe it is Quinn; Maybe they need off-season training; Etc.

 

[LOFIN]

Wrong. When your goalie lets in soft goals, it deflates the team.
Shitty offense or not. It's those poor offensive games, when you NEED your goaltender to stand tall and somehow win it.

Do you not remember Mr. Hank Lundqvist?

Speaking of, wonder how he would fare with this Martin led defense. Certainly better than Georgiev, anyway.

That Mr. Lundqvist, that 95% of this forum wanted gone because his days as a goaltender were over?

Don't kid yourself, he was BAD last season. Worse than Georgiev. His buyout was justified. End of story.

 

[Machinehead]

Kakko looks vastly improved and Lafreniere hasn’t played more than one season.

I’m disappointed too but you guys are taking the easy way out “getting to the bottom” of things. You said yourself that you guys are literally going with the theory that is the easiest to digest mentally.

Luck, sample size, randomness; Kakko played non-stop hockey his rookie year, and the exact opposite happened to Lafreniere; Maybe their styles of play take time; Maybe if Zibanejad didn’t forget how to score Lafreniere would have twice as many points; COVID-19; Maybe it is Quinn; Maybe they need off-season training; Etc.

It's the easiest to digest mentally but it also makes the most sense. Quinn comes from the NCAA where seniors are golden cows and it's a particularly bad environment for rookies. He's not a particularly great coach. Chytil got a lot better after getting away from the Rangers. We had to bring in an assistant to coach NHL defense. Quinn's flaws have been evident.

Why is this such a weird idea to people?

 

[Tawnos]

It's the easiest to digest mentally but it also makes the most sense. Quinn comes from the NCAA where seniors are golden cows and it's a particularly bad environment for rookies. He's not a particularly great coach. Chytil got a lot better after getting away from the Rangers. We had to bring in an assistant to coach NHL defense. Quinn's flaws have been evident.

Why is this such a weird idea to people?

Because it’s all based on a distortion of reality. Two examples from this post, because I’m not touching the assistant coach exaggerations again. If you want thoughts on that, read the back and forth about it in the Quinn thread from a few weeks ago.

-Yes, college tends to give the bulk of ice time to upperclassmen. The problem with your using that as a reason for Quinn not being good at developing young players is that Quinn was the guy responsible for turning underclassmen into those upperclassmen golden cows you refer to.

-Chytil got better after Quinn sent him to Hartford and said “work on these things.” Chytil went to Hartford, worked on those things, and became a better player. It didn’t happen because he wasn’t around the Rangers. It happened because the Rangers, including Quinn, take an active role in development.

It’s this kind of distortion in how those two things worked that make a lot of us shake our heads and say “that’s a weird idea.” They’re totally skewed, but this kind of thing is hardly uncommon among the people who are hyper critical of the coach.

There’s no doubt that we’d all like to have seen more offensive production out of Kakko/Lafreniére so far and are disappointed that we haven’t. But what’s happening here is that you, and others, are casting about for any reason to explain it and landing on the coach, when there are far more obvious and simple explanations (which have been given) to explain things.

I’ll say something else. There are a bunch of posters on this board right now, including you, who will have a back and forth with others over something you disagree about. Eventually you’ll stop the back and forth, and a day or a few days later you’ll come back to the boards with the same complaints, as if the back and forth never happened. And then you’ll claim that no one ever explains things. I showed you yesterday that neither of these guys are really very far outside of historical norms, but yet here you are again today with this “It's two years in a row an out-of-the-box NHL player forgot how to play hockey” stuff. People wonder why these boards have been pretty quiet lately, and it’s the prevalence of the feeling that we are engaged in the HF equivalent of screaming into the void that’s driving posters away. There’s no problem with a disagreement, and the object isn’t to persuade each other to agree, but the conversations should evolve and they never seem to.

 

[egelband]

I would actually like to see Trouba just become a solid stay at home guy and not worry about the offense.....I know he is overpaid but nothing can be done about that now....I just want him to focus on D assignments and be a Pric* to play against ....Let Fox , Hajek carry the puck on the right side . That should suffice and he just stick to the simple clearing of the puck from zone . KISS theory.....less turnovers hopefully .

Totally. I was very excited for the Trouba-ADA pair (obviously that never materialized) for this reason. It would have allowed - forced - Trouba to focus on being a defensive force.

 

[2014nyr]

It's the easiest to digest mentally but it also makes the most sense. Quinn comes from the NCAA where seniors are golden cows and it's a particularly bad environment for rookies. He's not a particularly great coach. Chytil got a lot better after getting away from the Rangers. We had to bring in an assistant to coach NHL defense. Quinn's flaws have been evident.

Why is this such a weird idea to people?

quinns mo at bu was recruiting high end talent though. his coaching didn't seem to negatively effect eichel his freshman year thats for damn sure.
i'm not trying to stump for quinn, its just too early to make that call. the easy / lazy answer re kakko/laf not producing more is its the coach. what exactly does changing the coach right now do for you? by all accounts hes popular in the room, there's been visible progress in a lot of areas. there's been young players that have broken out and vets who have seen their careers take off or reach even higher levels. so you fire quinn you're basically doing it for two kids. shine a bigger spotlight on them, i dont think its bright enough right now. single them out in the room. send a message you're not doing enough we need to fix you with a new voice. and if you do that, and it turns out that despite a new system, they still aren't meeting your expectations because its time that they need, where are you then? this thought process is trying to solve a problem that in all probability doesnt exist. this year especially is a complete outlier, people need to swallow some pride and let this play out a while longer because there is no shortcut

 

[Machinehead]

Because it’s all based on a distortion of reality. Two examples from this post, because I’m not touching the assistant coach exaggerations again. If you want thoughts on that, read the back and forth about it in the Quinn thread from a few weeks ago.

-Yes, college tends to give the bulk of ice time to upperclassmen. The problem with your using that as a reason for Quinn not being good at developing young players is that Quinn was the guy responsible for turning underclassmen into those upperclassmen golden cows you refer to.

-Chytil got better after Quinn sent him to Hartford and said “work on these things.” Chytil went to Hartford, worked on those things, and became a better player. It didn’t happen because he wasn’t around the Rangers. It happened because the Rangers, including Quinn, take an active role in development.

It’s this kind of distortion in how those two things worked that make a lot of us shake our heads and say “that’s a weird idea.” They’re totally skewed, but this kind of thing is hardly uncommon among the people who are hyper critical of the coach.

There’s no doubt that we’d all like to have seen more offensive production out of Kakko/Lafreniére so far and are disappointed that we haven’t. But what’s happening here is that you, and others, are casting about for any reason to explain it and landing on the coach, when there are far more obvious and simple explanations (which have been given) to explain things.

I’ll say something else. There are a bunch of posters on this board right now, including you, who will have a back and forth with others over something you disagree about. Eventually you’ll stop the back and forth, and a day or a few days later you’ll come back to the boards with the same complaints, as if the back and forth never happened. And then you’ll claim that no one ever explains things. I showed you yesterday that neither of these guys are really very far outside of historical norms, but yet here you are again today with this “It's two years in a row an out-of-the-box NHL player forgot how to play hockey” stuff. People wonder why these boards have been pretty quiet lately, and it’s the prevalence of the feeling that we are engaged in the HF equivalent of screaming into the void that’s driving posters away. There’s no problem with a disagreement, and the object isn’t to persuade each other to agree, but the conversations should evolve and they never seem to.

I don't know how much you expect the conversation to evolve as long as the results on the ice don't change. As long as people aren't being toxic (and I don't see that) they have a right to not be happy about things. With all due respect -and you've made valid points- absolutely nothing you say is going to make me happy about Lafreniere's season. Lafreniere is going to make me happy about Lafreniere's season.

I want somebody to explain to me why a group of posters still seem to react to the notion of firing the coach as if it's ridiculous. You've explained why you disagree, and that's fine, but I firmly disagree that being critical of the coach is a "distortion of reality." There are plenty of valid criticisms. There are valid criticisms of the coach that have nothing to do with our top picks!

I think the reason conversations seem to devolve into screaming into the void is because there's this inherent bias, always has been, that opinions critical of the Rangers are the wrong ones or the crazy ones, and opinions defending the Rangers are the sensible ones. I wish that were true but there's no reason to think it is and it's really not fair.

I don't think anybody critical of Quinn has been not sensible except for the usual suspects who are like that about everything.

Also, let's not talk about debates on the coach driving people away when we have DeAngelo shitposting in EVERY f***ING GDT that's just allowed to continue. There's a difference between critical and toxic and that's it right there.

 

[Machinehead]

quinns mo at bu was recruiting high end talent though. his coaching didn't seem to negatively effect eichel his freshman year thats for damn sure.
i'm not trying to stump for quinn, its just too early to make that call. the easy / lazy answer re kakko/laf not producing more is its the coach. what exactly does changing the coach right now do for you? by all accounts hes popular in the room, there's been visible progress in a lot of areas. there's been young players that have broken out and vets who have seen their careers take off or reach even higher levels. so you fire quinn you're basically doing it for two kids. shine a bigger spotlight on them, i dont think its bright enough right now. single them out in the room. send a message you're not doing enough we need to fix you with a new voice. and if you do that, and it turns out that despite a new system, they still aren't meeting your expectations because its time that they need, where are you then? this thought process is trying to solve a problem that in all probability doesnt exist. this year especially is a complete outlier, people need to swallow some pride and let this play out a while longer because there is no shortcut

People say it's easy/lazy but that's sort of part of it in a way.

I think, best case scenario, this guy is just a generic coach and we wouldn't have lost anything. I feel like people act as though we're letting go of a guy that's had a ton of success with this team. That's the part I don't get.

Let's say I'm wrong, and nothing improves post-Quinn. What have we lost? What does Quinn provide that 35 other Joe Schmoes don't?

And more generally, I've always believed that there aren't many difference-making good coaches in the NHL, but there are bad ones. So I've always seen cutting bait as a low-risk move.

 

[Tawnos]

I don't know how much you expect the conversation to evolve as long as the results on the ice don't change. As long as people aren't being toxic (and I don't see that) they have a right to not be happy about things. With all due respect -and you've made valid points- absolutely nothing you say is going to make me happy about Lafreniere's season. Lafreniere is going to make me happy about Lafreniere's season.

I want somebody to explain to me why a group of posters still seem to react to the notion of firing the coach as if it's ridiculous. You've explained why you disagree, and that's fine, but I firmly disagree that being critical of the coach is a "distortion of reality." There are plenty of valid criticisms. There are valid criticisms of the coach that have nothing to do with our top picks!

I think the reason conversations seem to devolve into screaming into the void is because there's this inherent bias, always has been, that opinions critical of the Rangers are the wrong ones or the crazy ones, and opinions defending the Rangers are the sensible ones. I wish that were true but there's no reason to think it is and it's really not fair.

I don't think anybody critical of Quinn has been not sensible except for the usual suspects who are like that about everything.

Also, let's not talk about debates on the coach driving people away when we have DeAngelo shitposting in EVERY f***ING GDT that's just allowed to continue. There's a difference between critical and toxic and that's it right there.

I'm not trying to make you "happy" with Lafrenière's season. That's not what I want, because I'm not "happy" with it myself. I just think that pinning the blame on ANYONE misses what's happened here. It only becomes that way if you take out all context and all circumstance.

What you said about Quinn's college experience and about Chytil aren't distortions of reality because they're criticisms. They're distortions of reality because, in one case, it's taking what would indicate a strength of the coach and twisting it's meaning so it seems like a weakness in order to fit it into something you're not happy with, and in the other case, an outright fabrication.

Also, I call bullshit about the inherent bias here being away from criticism. Feeling negatively about the team has been the default position of these boards in the majority of the 15+ years I've come here. I know, because I tend to be an optimist and have been arguing with the pessimists the whole time. That's not what I'm talking about. It's not about positive or negative, critical or uncritical. It's about ignoring the conversation around you in favor of your narrative.

And MH, I hate to break it to you... *you* are one of the usual suspects.

 

[kovazub94]

Over 82 games, Panarin is on pace for 103 points and Kreider is on pace for 44 goals. Fox is close to a 50-point pace. Strome hasn't missed a beat and Buchnevich is almost a PPG player. It's just Zibanehad.

How long are we going to keep using that as an excuse for our young players being 4th liners?

The vets are fine.

Over 82 games, lol. Panarin missed what 10 games? If you’re so good at extrapolating please extrapolate how big part of the season he missed so far? And you just saw how important he’s to the whole team - other pieces to fall into place. Zibanejad? Your 1C who was still getting 1C minutes when he honestly should’ve been scratched or get bottom lines minutes for his own sake but couldn’t because Chytil was out. These are the Rangers inarguably two most important forwards and somehow you’re doing mental gymnastics to find issues elsewhere.

And trust me when I tell you - you’d still be miserable if Kakko and Lafreniere were getting points. I’ve been around this place long enough to not be fooled.