Player Discussion Alain Vigneault Part VI

[Nickmo82]

AV is in the NHL because he's had exclusively Hall of Fame goaltending in his career.

Him calling out goaltending is a fish calling out water.

The man is not well.

Yep. Came to say this. Goaltending is his whole career. Without Hank and Luongo, he wouldn't have shit.

f*** this guy for trying to throw Lundqvist under a bus. What an asshole.

 

[egelband]

AV is definitely not getting the most out of this team. And it’s frustrating. But I’m not going to start attacking the guy. The anger here is a bit unnerving. Not from everyone, of course. Just for my two cents, I think taking a step back is a good thing.

 

[SirGoose]

Haven't seen much discussion as far as replacements for AV. If we're not planning to compete next year and are going to have some patience, I vote Tippet. If we want to make a run in 19-20, I think Quenneville should be our target. I'm not a fan of Lombardi, but the coaching pool should be wide open and filled with talent. Have Stanley Cup pedigree is nice, but Tippet is unreal with young players and imo has yet to prove himself with a contending team. He's hungrier.

 

[Inferno]

Sheldon keefe.

 

[True Blue]

I keep forgetting to post this Brooksie article on Rangers/AV:

https://nypost.com/2018/02/07/the-pros-and-cons-of-moving-forward-without-alain-vigneault/

Some stuff that we have all said before:

Truth be told, even with a lineup marked with deep potholes down the middle and on the blue line, which lately has been ravaged by injuries, the Rangers have not seemed responsive for long stretches at a time to Vigneault’s particular style, which might work best with a veteran team dotted with strong leaders.

The coach is a devout believer in allowing the players to establish the tone and in delegating off-ice authority to the men in uniform.

That’s a fine approach if there’s a fiery Cup-winning leader such as a Marty St. Louis or a pack of strong voices in the room, but there is ample reason to question whether that would be the most productive philosophy for a club that is expected to be unusually young next season.

There is also reason to question whether Vigneault is the right man to trust with the development of a very young team, given his tendencies to practice tough love on kids while according the benefit of the doubt to veterans, even those who are marginal NHLers. This is not at all unique among NHL coaches, but it does seem particularly pronounced here.

The Rangers’ play in the defensive zone has been chaotic for much of the past three seasons in concert with a deterioration of talent. But Vigneault has not seemed to adapt his on-ice system to his personnel. He wants to play the same way with this group as he did when a rising Ryan McDonagh, a younger Dan Girardi, a younger Marc Staal, a formidable Anton Stralman and a stout Kevin Klein were on the blue line. The front of Henrik Lundqvist’s net is the soft underbelly of the team that has gone unaddressed for years. The overload system meant to produce quick breakout passes seems too much for these past few groups to master.

Plus, there must be an inspection of whether Vigneault’s undying belief in whistle-to-whistle, turn-the-other-cheek hockey has created a passive mentality among the Rangers. When Chris Kreider stood up for McDonagh after the captain was run from behind by Steven Stamkos in Tampa Bay in Game 6 of the 2015 conference finals, No. 20 was rebuked by the coach for picking up an additional two minutes. When Brendan Smith stood up for Tony DeAngelo in an imbroglio in L.A. with Trevor Lewis on Jan. 21, he was chastised for picking up a bad penalty.

 

[Edge]

I personally don’t think AV is an awful coach and I think we tend to blame him for too much at times.

With that said, his time here has come and gone. Moving forward with a retool/rebuild/whatever, will best be served with a different coach.

It’s Time.

 

[Inferno]

The stupid man overload system...I just hate it @Edge ...you see guys open on the far side point to walk the puck in like 20 times a game...

 

[haveandare]

I keep forgetting to post this Brooksie article on Rangers/AV:

https://nypost.com/2018/02/07/the-pros-and-cons-of-moving-forward-without-alain-vigneault/

Some stuff that we have all said before:

Truth be told, even with a lineup marked with deep potholes down the middle and on the blue line, which lately has been ravaged by injuries, the Rangers have not seemed responsive for long stretches at a time to Vigneault’s particular style, which might work best with a veteran team dotted with strong leaders.

The coach is a devout believer in allowing the players to establish the tone and in delegating off-ice authority to the men in uniform.

That’s a fine approach if there’s a fiery Cup-winning leader such as a Marty St. Louis or a pack of strong voices in the room, but there is ample reason to question whether that would be the most productive philosophy for a club that is expected to be unusually young next season.

There is also reason to question whether Vigneault is the right man to trust with the development of a very young team, given his tendencies to practice tough love on kids while according the benefit of the doubt to veterans, even those who are marginal NHLers. This is not at all unique among NHL coaches, but it does seem particularly pronounced here.

The Rangers’ play in the defensive zone has been chaotic for much of the past three seasons in concert with a deterioration of talent. But Vigneault has not seemed to adapt his on-ice system to his personnel. He wants to play the same way with this group as he did when a rising Ryan McDonagh, a younger Dan Girardi, a younger Marc Staal, a formidable Anton Stralman and a stout Kevin Klein were on the blue line. The front of Henrik Lundqvist’s net is the soft underbelly of the team that has gone unaddressed for years. The overload system meant to produce quick breakout passes seems too much for these past few groups to master.

Plus, there must be an inspection of whether Vigneault’s undying belief in whistle-to-whistle, turn-the-other-cheek hockey has created a passive mentality among the Rangers. When Chris Kreider stood up for McDonagh after the captain was run from behind by Steven Stamkos in Tampa Bay in Game 6 of the 2015 conference finals, No. 20 was rebuked by the coach for picking up an additional two minutes. When Brendan Smith stood up for Tony DeAngelo in an imbroglio in L.A. with Trevor Lewis on Jan. 21, he was chastised for picking up a bad penalty.

These are all excellent points against him. Good to see Brooks saying it, makes me hope that management might see it too.

 

[Off Sides]

Many coaches in a way are their own worst enemy, they get ideas in their heads and if they don't work or stop working the reason is never that it was a bad idea, it's always the roster is incapable of performing.

So they pressure/influence management to go get players that they think can live up to their ideas while ignoring the inputs some other players are bringing. Most of the time it ends up with a team who can only play one style.

Same thing happened with Torts. Team ended up a good defensive team yet was a terrible transition team. AV now has a decent transition team but a terrible defending one.

To me that is why the first year of AV was the best, the players and roster build were only incorporating some of his ideas, in a way it was the best of both ideas. Then it tipped further and further towards AVs ideas and now the scale is way off balance.

 

[True Blue]

Same thing happened with Torts. Team ended up a good defensive team yet was a terrible transition team. AV now has a decent transition team but a terrible defending one.

I will be on the other side of this. And add to it that at least Torts has shown that he can coach differently, depending on his personnel. It Tampa, it was safe is death. When he got to NY, the talent level was not there, but a superstar goalie was. So he geared his team to win 1-0, 2-1 games. The talent for great transition was not there

AV, has coached exactly the same. Vancouver was identical. And has failed the same way. When your idea of transition is home run stretch pass and then only offense is created off of the rush, there are inherent deficiencies in that thinking.

 

[Off Sides]

I will be on the other side of this. And add to it that at least Torts has shown that he can coach differently, depending on his personnel. It Tampa, it was safe is death. When he got to NY, the talent level was not there, but a superstar goalie was. So he geared his team to win 1-0, 2-1 games. The talent for great transition was not there

AV, has coached exactly the same. Vancouver was identical. And has failed the same way. When your idea of transition is home run stretch pass and then only offense is created off of the rush, there are inherent deficiencies in that thinking.

I would not say AV has a roster that has a lot of good in zone defensive players either.

The roster under Torts was becoming more talented, but he was not adjusting either. It was always stretch pass to tip into other teams zone, and try to go get it, yet by the time that transpired the go get it players were going off for a line change. Defensively it was all collapse, block, be in the way. In the Boston series they really took advantage because they had players who had good point shots, and they were open to take them.

I'd like some sort of hybrid between the two coaches, something like if the play is not there going up ice, tip it in and go get it if not tired, but if the play is there, take the chance to hold possession through the neutral zone. Similar defensively, I don't mind the man to man pressure if there are switch points where they do not follow and drop back into more of a zone, yet I don't want them all to stand in front and collapse either.

None of that is to excuse or blame either coach, the roster under both was hardly ever well rounded, and really the closest it was, was under AVs first season, which brings me back to my point, management does a disservice to their own rosters when they go about tailoring it towards any one coach.

 

[Mikos87]

The stupid man overload system...I just hate it @Edge ...you see guys open on the far side point to walk the puck in like 20 times a game...

The East adapted to it. Coaches adapt to his system because they know where the Rangers are going to be positionally if you move pucks and bodies towards one direction and peel off, or cross over on a cycle.

Add-in the open bodied flat footed defense... (fire Ruff)... you get those controlled entries against and clean slot shots.

When Henrik is looking up at guys and saying WTF... that's how you know the guy made a Pejorative Slur play.

 

[True Blue]

Add-in the open bodied flat footed defense... (fire Ruff)... you get those controlled entries against and clean slot shots.

Ruff.....Samuelson.....Beuk......Makes absolutely no difference. The same defensive mistakes are made over and over and over again. The names of the defensemen changes but the same mistakes are made. When the names of the player does not change, the same mistakes are made. What is the commonality? Vigneault. This is his system. The assistants coach to his specifications. We have no idea of what any of those 3 would have installed. Because they do not install anything. The AV vaunted system continues to be in the spotlight.

 

[Mikos87]

Ruff.....Samuelson.....Beuk......Makes absolutely no difference. The same defensive mistakes are made over and over and over again. The names of the defensemen changes but the same mistakes are made. When the names of the player does not change, the same mistakes are made. What is the commonality? Vigneault. This is his system. The assistants coach to his specifications. We have no idea of what any of those 3 would have installed. Because they do not install anything. The AV vaunted system continues to be in the spotlight.

In total agreement. It's the shitty system.

 

[RGY]

That 4th goal was a clear example of how flawed AV’s system is. In their own end, the wingers do not play tight to the boards and/or pointmen. They play f***ing loose and collapse to help a goalie they pay over $8 million per year to be the best in the league.

On the 4th goal, Skjei is in trouble (and although this decision was questionable) plays the puck around the boards from behind his net. NOBODY THERE. NOBODY.

f*** AV. f*** HIM.

 

[Irishguy42]

That fourth goal is a goal we've seen pretty much every night since AV became coach. Leaving a man open in front.

It's like...classic AV-Rangers hockey.

 

[egelband]

Can someone explain AV’s system a bit? I know that on defense the team tends to scramble and leave offensive players open a lot. I hear a lot about this “man to man” defense. I assume I’m not fully understanding but it seems to me it would be more efficient and simple to give each player an area of the ice to patrol. Players would then know their responsibility very clearly. It’s seems AV has them, to use a basketball term, “switching” constantly. I wonder if hes making it too complex. Something that’s basically simple being made unmanageable. But I don’t know. So asking.

 

[ponytrekker]

I keep forgetting to post this Brooksie article on Rangers/AV:

https://nypost.com/2018/02/07/the-pros-and-cons-of-moving-forward-without-alain-vigneault/

Some stuff that we have all said before:

Plus, there must be an inspection of whether Vigneault’s undying belief in whistle-to-whistle, turn-the-other-cheek hockey has created a passive mentality among the Rangers. When Chris Kreider stood up for McDonagh after the captain was run from behind by Steven Stamkos in Tampa Bay in Game 6 of the 2015 conference finals, No. 20 was rebuked by the coach for picking up an additional two minutes. When Brendan Smith stood up for Tony DeAngelo in an imbroglio in L.A. with Trevor Lewis on Jan. 21, he was chastised for picking up a bad penalty.

I got into a huge argument with a blogger about this. This softness resulted in 3 hurt players in two days.

 

[ponytrekker]

Can someone explain AV’s system a bit? I know that on defense the team tends to scramble and leave offensive players open a lot. I hear a lot about this “man to man” defense. I assume I’m not fully understanding but it seems to me it would be more efficient and simple to give each player an area of the ice to patrol. Players would then know their responsibility very clearly. It’s seems AV has them, to use a basketball term, “switching” constantly. I wonder if hes making it too complex. Something that’s basically simple being made unmanageable. But I don’t know. So asking.

Ding ding ding. Watch Vegas. They create a box so structured, you could build a skyscraper on it.

 

[Tawnos]

Can someone explain AV’s system a bit? I know that on defense the team tends to scramble and leave offensive players open a lot. I hear a lot about this “man to man” defense. I assume I’m not fully understanding but it seems to me it would be more efficient and simple to give each player an area of the ice to patrol. Players would then know their responsibility very clearly. It’s seems AV has them, to use a basketball term, “switching” constantly. I wonder if hes making it too complex. Something that’s basically simple being made unmanageable. But I don’t know. So asking.

The purpose of the defensive system isn’t about defense, it’s about offense. It runs off the idea that zone systems lead to players standing around, while the man system gets players moving so that, when you do force a turnover, guys aren’t starting from a standstill. That leads to moving the puck up the ice more quickly. Two or three passes and gone. First one or two short to fly the zone and the next long to stretch the neutral zone. That also means that players have to be quick to release their assignments and put themselves into position to receive a pass.

The trade-off is a conscious one, and that’s being more vulnerable to lost coverages as switching is more likely to have mistakes and players might misjudge when the team is going on offense by either flying the zone too quickly or not being in position to receive a pass quickly enough. It relies on an elite goaltender to be there to bail you out in those situations.

When you have the right group of players, it works phenomenally well. The real indictment on AV here is that he has both failed to recognize that he no longer has the goalie or players to run this system effectively and has not changed his strategy.

 

[Inferno]

The purpose of the defensive system isn’t about defense, it’s about offense. It runs off the idea that zone systems lead to players standing around, while the man system gets players moving so that, when you do force a turnover, guys aren’t starting from a standstill. That leads to moving the puck up the ice more quickly. Two or three passes and gone. First one or two short to fly the zone and the next long to stretch the neutral zone. That also means that players have to be quick to release their assignments and put themselves into position to receive a pass.

The trade-off is a conscious one, and that’s being more vulnerable to lost coverages as switching is more likely to have mistakes and players might misjudge when the team is going on offense by either flying the zone too quickly or not being in position to receive a pass quickly enough. It relies on an elite goaltender to be there to bail you out in those situations.

When you have the right group of players, it works phenomenally well. The real indictment on AV here is that he has both failed to recognize that he no longer has the goalie or players to run this system effectively and has not changed his strategy.

They also overload on the boards..assuming they can force the turnover..the problem is that it they don't during an overload one cross ice pass and you've got someone either in the slot or in the circles all alone with all day to pick corners.

 

[Tawnos]

They also overload on the boards..assuming they can force the turnover..the problem is that it they don't during an overload one cross ice pass and you've got someone either in the slot or in the circles all alone with all day to pick corners.

Right, true. The likelihood of that turnover also comes from the ability level of the roster.

 

[egelband]

Thank you. Much appreciated. Very interesting.
Does anyone notice that players coming new to the Rangers often look very dynamic the first few games and then kind of fade out... certainly there are multiple reasons for it. But I wonder if one of the reasons is they’re not indoctrinated yet. I know Hartford plays a similar system. But even a guy like McLeod was getting chances upon joining.
Meh. Probably just adrenaline joining a new team. but figured I’d see what you all think.

 

[Chimpradamus]

Ding ding ding. Watch Vegas. They create a box so structured, you could build a skyscraper on it.

That's because Vegas has a coach that knows what he's doing. They are a very fast team, yet they play a structured zone defense and still create alot of oddman rushes. Vigneault's mind is blown. Their coach doesn't like giving up 20 quality chances every game for some extra offense.

This is a metaphor for Vigneault and his system. The car is the system.

 

[haohmaru]

Is he still here?