The team's roster the past 2 seasons have been hot garbage. It's a miracle how they got 100+pts in both years to be honest.
Of course, the roster now is even worse.
Player Discussion Alain Vigneault Part VI
- Thread starter Fugazy
- Start date
- Status
Of course, the roster now is even worse.
A poorly constructed team is not the same as lacking talent. Compare the forwards from his tenure to that which Torts dealt with and it is a tale of two cities.
Aside from poor construction, the system is predicated on the goalie standing on their head. Not a recipe that most teams will win with.
No, everything is not his fault. But deployment of players and strategy is. Icing a defense that has Kampfner, Holden and Staal taking regular shifts may be worse than what is currently in the AHL. And Staal has started this year better than last.
More of the same. We said the same exact thing last year.
Off Sides
Registered User
- Sep 8, 2008
- 9,755
- 5,585
This is not to say that even with a better roster AV would be a better coach but
Where would you rank the defenders in terms of 1st 2nd and 3rd pair? Or the forwards for that matter in terms of what you'd think of typically as first line, 2nd and so forth on a team who is looking to contend?
Like is Nash a top line player on a Stanley Cup team? The only top line players I think they have who would find themselves in that spot on a cup team are Zbad if he continues like he has, and Zucc.
Same for D, perhaps McD find himself on top pair, the others?
What I am trying to say is while AV makes bad choices what are his options? To allow Smith to stink and let ADA continue to think he is playing well? Or does he need those two to play better than they ever have in their careers to just make the playoffs this year?
Management has to take some responsibility as well, what type of season is this supposed to be?
A transition year, if so to what ends? Did they already decide to sell Nash no matter where they are in the standings come deadline time? If it is a transition year would that not support benching some players who are playing well below what they should be capable of?
A contending year, they signed Shattenkirk, Smith, bolstered the line-up with DD and Cracknell. If it's a contending year why get futures for Stepan?
A rebuilding year, they traded for an extra first and a talented yet raw D? But why the signings and the keeping of Staal?
They are not picking a direction through roster building, they are playing both sides, they want to rebuild yet also contend, it's never going to work with AV or any other coach.
LORDE
I am Lorde, YA YA YA
I’m sure AV didn’t agree with many of the passes and clearing attempts last night.
This team, right now, is playing cute hockey. They think they’re skilled and great but they’re not... or maybe not AS much as they think they are.
Agreed on AV’s system being suspect... maybe even on benching ADA (I’ll wait on that to see when he comes back in)... but some of the BONEHEADED plays aren’t being condoned by him I can guarantee that. It’s a fine line between highly skilled and reckless... the ones that pull it off more show better judgement... the trick is knowing when to NOT try it
This team, right now, is playing cute hockey. They think they’re skilled and great but they’re not... or maybe not AS much as they think they are.
Agreed on AV’s system being suspect... maybe even on benching ADA (I’ll wait on that to see when he comes back in)... but some of the BONEHEADED plays aren’t being condoned by him I can guarantee that. It’s a fine line between highly skilled and reckless... the ones that pull it off more show better judgement... the trick is knowing when to NOT try it
The amount of excuses the AV fan club makes for him is astounding.
"Its the roster" and "hes not as bad as John Muckler" are not valid arguments for him. Neither the roster or John Muckler have forced him to give big minutes to players who can't handle them anymore, throw Kampfer out there on the PK, or to play a f***ing stupid ass system that has the team chasing the game most of the time.
When was the last time this team played more than 3 games in a row where they looked sharp right out of the gate? f*** when was the last time they did that 2 games in a row? Why do they tend to have 2nd period lulls more often than not? Why do they go through prolonged stretches where they look completely disjointed as a unit?
Thats all on coaching. Some say AV is a bottom 5 coach, I think hes clearly bottom 3 and probably the worst overall coach in the league right now unless you want to throw some unproven guys below him, though I'd bet those guys wouldn't put Staal out there to protect a lead with under a minute to go only to watch it blow up in your face, TWICE.
The thought that this team has overachieved under his watch is a joke too. They were supposed to be good in 13-14 and 14-15. They under achieved in 15-16 and okay, they exceeded expectations last year (which is pretty much eliminated by the fact that he completely blew the Senators series and has learned NOTHING from it.)
/Rant over.
"Its the roster" and "hes not as bad as John Muckler" are not valid arguments for him. Neither the roster or John Muckler have forced him to give big minutes to players who can't handle them anymore, throw Kampfer out there on the PK, or to play a f***ing stupid ass system that has the team chasing the game most of the time.
When was the last time this team played more than 3 games in a row where they looked sharp right out of the gate? f*** when was the last time they did that 2 games in a row? Why do they tend to have 2nd period lulls more often than not? Why do they go through prolonged stretches where they look completely disjointed as a unit?
Thats all on coaching. Some say AV is a bottom 5 coach, I think hes clearly bottom 3 and probably the worst overall coach in the league right now unless you want to throw some unproven guys below him, though I'd bet those guys wouldn't put Staal out there to protect a lead with under a minute to go only to watch it blow up in your face, TWICE.
The thought that this team has overachieved under his watch is a joke too. They were supposed to be good in 13-14 and 14-15. They under achieved in 15-16 and okay, they exceeded expectations last year (which is pretty much eliminated by the fact that he completely blew the Senators series and has learned NOTHING from it.)
/Rant over.
Inferno
Registered User
I'm just waiting for Buchnevich to be moved to the 4th line and Vesey moved up to his spot...
Sure, people call me crazy..but when I said i wouldnt be surprised at all if this idiot put Staal with McDonagh...what was said then?
Sure, people call me crazy..but when I said i wouldnt be surprised at all if this idiot put Staal with McDonagh...what was said then?
Still rejects the premise that goaltending carries the team.
There was a point in time that it did though.
Also, the 15-16 Rangers didn't underperform by any means. They ran into a team that was in the best form at the time. Unless, you think they should've beaten Pittsburgh that year Lol.
They blew it by winning the last game of the season when there was no need. They would've played Florida which was basically a 1st round bye. 2nd round would've played a Stamkos-less Tampa which also is a series theyd probably win. That win on the final day was the worst thing to happen to this team.
Edge
Kris King's Ghost
I love Lundqvist, but calling him a generational talent is a bit of a reach. He wasn't that far ahead of the curve when it comes to his peers. A definite HOF'er, but I think the term generational talent gets thrown around a bit too much.
As for AV, there are a number of players who have developed into very good players under his watch. But that's always the catch-22 with AV.
If a young player becomes a star under his watch, it's clearly in spite of him. If he makes two cup appearances, it's clearly luck. His systems suck, clearly the goalie is the reason he's winning.
You don't win 600 NHL games as a coach, including nearly 500 in 11 years by just "being lucky." Not in the NHL.
It's hard argument to make if we're just going to throw every success that's taken place under his watch out the window.
The development of guys like Zucc, McD, Kreider, Miller, Hayes, Brassard, Skjei, Talbot, Raanta, even Klein, all took place under the AV coaching staffs.
The first cup appearance in a generation.
The development of the Rangers best defenseman in a generation.
But that's the fun part. If those guys don't succeed, it's because of AV and no one else.
If they do succeed, it's because the GM did a good job of finding talent and being in a win-now mode. It's hard to argue it both ways.
We cite a generational goalie, and yet our records didn't take a dive with Talbot or Raanta in net. Clearly all Benoit Allaire.
And if not him, it was the defense the GM assembled and the moves to acquire those goalies. And if not that, it's the excellent work of scouts for finding the guys.
And if not that, I'm sure we'd find some other reason why it's anyone, anything, just so long as it has nothing to do with AV.
We blame him for cannibalizing youth, and yet I'm hard pressed to find a young talent that dyed on the vine under AV. And clearly the list of those who succeeded did so in spite of him. Working three rookies into the lineup? Nope, he hates youth. And this despite not having a first round pick from 2013-2016.
We talk about benefiting from a win-now mindset. I don't know about you guys, but I remember being in win-now mentalities in other seasons and not having this level of success.
Sure there are things I don't like - an overrelianceon guys like Staal or Girardi, a little too much rope for certain vets, some of his constantly shifting combinations.
But I also know that the way complaints flow about AV is eerily similar to how they flowed about every other coach.
These coaches have had varying levels of success, though I'd argue AV leads the pack. They've had different styles, different strengths and different weaknesses, different systems, different players, different challenges and different opportunities.
The only constant is that we still think they're all idiots who should be fired. The joys of fandom.
Someday, AV won't be the Rangers coach. And the next guy will be an idiot for the things we don't agree with him about either.
As for AV, there are a number of players who have developed into very good players under his watch. But that's always the catch-22 with AV.
If a young player becomes a star under his watch, it's clearly in spite of him. If he makes two cup appearances, it's clearly luck. His systems suck, clearly the goalie is the reason he's winning.
You don't win 600 NHL games as a coach, including nearly 500 in 11 years by just "being lucky." Not in the NHL.
It's hard argument to make if we're just going to throw every success that's taken place under his watch out the window.
The development of guys like Zucc, McD, Kreider, Miller, Hayes, Brassard, Skjei, Talbot, Raanta, even Klein, all took place under the AV coaching staffs.
The first cup appearance in a generation.
The development of the Rangers best defenseman in a generation.
But that's the fun part. If those guys don't succeed, it's because of AV and no one else.
If they do succeed, it's because the GM did a good job of finding talent and being in a win-now mode. It's hard to argue it both ways.
We cite a generational goalie, and yet our records didn't take a dive with Talbot or Raanta in net. Clearly all Benoit Allaire.
And if not him, it was the defense the GM assembled and the moves to acquire those goalies. And if not that, it's the excellent work of scouts for finding the guys.
And if not that, I'm sure we'd find some other reason why it's anyone, anything, just so long as it has nothing to do with AV.
We blame him for cannibalizing youth, and yet I'm hard pressed to find a young talent that dyed on the vine under AV. And clearly the list of those who succeeded did so in spite of him. Working three rookies into the lineup? Nope, he hates youth. And this despite not having a first round pick from 2013-2016.
We talk about benefiting from a win-now mindset. I don't know about you guys, but I remember being in win-now mentalities in other seasons and not having this level of success.
Sure there are things I don't like - an overrelianceon guys like Staal or Girardi, a little too much rope for certain vets, some of his constantly shifting combinations.
But I also know that the way complaints flow about AV is eerily similar to how they flowed about every other coach.
These coaches have had varying levels of success, though I'd argue AV leads the pack. They've had different styles, different strengths and different weaknesses, different systems, different players, different challenges and different opportunities.
The only constant is that we still think they're all idiots who should be fired. The joys of fandom.
Someday, AV won't be the Rangers coach. And the next guy will be an idiot for the things we don't agree with him about either.
Last edited:
LeetchisGod
This is a bad hockey team.
I hope you AV apologists enjoy watching Holden-Kampfer as our shutdown pairing.
Edge
Kris King's Ghost
Personally, I'm not apologizing for AV.
I just think there's more to the discussion than AV is awesome and AV is dog poo.
I just think there's more to the discussion than AV is awesome and AV is dog poo.
DanielBrassard
It's all so tiresome
The 15-16 Rangers were a bad team that made the playoffs because Hank played out of his mind the first 20 games.
The 15-16 Rangers are a lottery team if Lundqvist wasn't basically God for 8 weeks.
My guess is that we see this team take that route and while it won't be entirely AV's fault, he'll surely be a key contributor (already gave away at least a point by over playing Kampfer last night.)
PlamsUnlimited
Big Church Bells
AV is good, but like all coaches, the roster sometimes isn't the best for how they coach and vice versa, I think we're seeing what happens at the end of Torts' time here too. Team is kind of struggling to reach their potential, some facets of the Rangers' game are lacking heavily, even after netting some good players and retaining some in the offseason. Generally I would think this would be the time to adapt but I have not seen much of it yet.
@Edge - That first paragraph, are you kidding me?! If you dive into the numbers a bit then it's quite clear that Henrik Lundqvist is a generational goalie, he's got a good case for the 2nd best goalie in the "modern" (70s/80's-now) era after Hasek. His consistency is completely unheard of.
So yes, Henrik Lundqvist is definitely a generational goalie.
So yes, Henrik Lundqvist is definitely a generational goalie.
RangerLifer
Formerly known as Captain Lindy
If this were true, then our backups would have horrible records. Our backups have always been good too.
And he fell apart near the end of the season. Raanta ended up with basically the same save percentage.
Our back ups have gotten cherry picked starts aside from Talbot when Hank went down.
Talbot has shown that he is a legit starter in this league, that doesn't always happen.
Raanta isn't doing what Hank did to start that season. They would have been dead in the water.
Both Talbot and Raanta are excellent goalies in their own right and they've certainly gotten some soft schedules aswell.
I totally agree that AV shouldn't stay here after this year. The team can score, but they don't play an efficient style of game. It's deja Vu with the Torts era in his last year.
Just like back then, I think that goes back to the roster issue though. There's no center that can dominate possession. Impossible to deploy without the personnel.
So you can hire Julien or Sutter, but at the end of the day the elephant in the room remains. Easy to coach with Bergeron, Kopitar, Carter and Krejci centering your lines. Am I doing this right?
Just like back then, I think that goes back to the roster issue though. There's no center that can dominate possession. Impossible to deploy without the personnel.
So you can hire Julien or Sutter, but at the end of the day the elephant in the room remains. Easy to coach with Bergeron, Kopitar, Carter and Krejci centering your lines. Am I doing this right?
Im not sure what kind of nanny nanny poo poo post this is 4 games into the season - especially when those changes yielded 2 goals against over the previous 2 games (not counting empty netter) after the Rangers got their doors blown off defensively in the first 2 games.
- Status
