- Nov 2, 2011
- 7,967
- 8,337
He is trying to average out the body size of the line. We're over here looking at the wrong stats. AV got that moneyball stat in height by weight, we have been blinded.
Player Discussion Alain Vigneault Part VI
- Thread starter Fugazy
- Start date
- Status
- Nov 2, 2011
- 7,967
- 8,337
There have been a couple insider things that directly contradict your fear(s).
Phoicon
Take these broken wings and learn to fly again.
Here you go. See the 4 rangers collapsing ("over-powering") the puck carrier who feeds W77 coming down the right wing for what is a hockey version of a free lay-up.
It's particularly outrageous because from the earliest age hockey players are taught to:
- Leave the man with the puck alone, to the goaltender if need be, take the open men away from the play...
- and never allow two defensemen to take one man...
- let alone two defensemen take the man with the puck...
- let alone invite the centreman and the winger to join in the pile.
The defense is a young core and they use players with very little NHL experience or too slow like Marc Staal.
Inferno
Registered User
Right now the rangers have only 2 defenseman on their roster who I think have long term futures with this team...skjei and pionk.
Gilmour is highly debateable.
Gilmour is highly debateable.
silverfish
got perma'd
lmfao. At least it wasn't four guys chasing one dude behind the net this time?
Irishguy42
Mr. Preachy
GregSirico
KakkoSZN
This summary nails it.
Here you go. See the 4 rangers collapsing ("over-powering") the puck carrier who feeds W77 coming down the right wing for what is a hockey version of a free lay-up.
It's particularly outrageous because from the earliest age hockey players are taught to:
Are people still surprised we give up early goals almost every game? It's like one team in an NBA game allows their opponents to have a dunk contest in the first 10 minutes. Then our guys' instinct and decades of prior training kicks in and they begin to ignore this crazy game plan. WTF?
- Leave the man with the puck alone, to the goaltender if need be, take the open men away from the play...
- and never allow two defensemen to take one man...
- let alone two defensemen take the man with the puck...
- let alone invite the centreman and the winger to join in the pile.
- Aug 5, 2010
- 13,886
- 9,516
AV system sucks for sure, but this mishap was largely due to Hayes forgetting he was moved to LW for this game.
Phoicon
Take these broken wings and learn to fly again.
If you are referring to the mishap I illustrated in my post then that is not probable since wingers do not get assigned wingers to cover in the defensive zone or when the opposing team rushes up the ice. It would have been the job of the LD to take the open man (Oshie, I think) no matter the system the team plays.
LW forechecks and gets back to cover the trailing defender. By the way, we are terrible at covering the trailing player as well.
It´s near impossible to play ice-hockey when wingers have to cover wingers since the winger on the attack almost always has a speed advantage (maybe someone like Kreider or Hagelin can neutralise that advantage, sometimes) and you as the defending winger will always be a step behind or backing off into your own defenders.
Stuff happens when wingers forecheck all the time - your winger falls because of bad ice or gets beat by the opposing team rushing at him with speed or a winger misses an assignment/is caught daydreaming. Defenders are taught to expect the team on the attack to have a numerical advantage and speed on their side.
Machinehead
Fox Mafia Consigliere
Here you go. See the 4 rangers collapsing ("over-powering") the puck carrier who feeds W77 coming down the right wing for what is a hockey version of a free lay-up.
It's particularly outrageous because from the earliest age hockey players are taught to:
Are people still surprised we give up early goals almost every game? It's like one team in an NBA game allows their opponents to have a dunk contest in the first 10 minutes. Then our guys' instinct and decades of prior training kicks in and they begin to ignore this crazy game plan. WTF?
- Leave the man with the puck alone, to the goaltender if need be, take the open men away from the play...
- and never allow two defensemen to take one man...
- let alone two defensemen take the man with the puck...
- let alone invite the centreman and the winger to join in the pile.
Add this to the fact that we don't cycle, don't have a breakout scheme, don't have a neutral zone scheme, and don't practice zone entries, and it becomes increasingly obvious that there is no gameplan.
The only component to AV's system is telling everyone how intricate his imaginary system is.
Machinehead
Fox Mafia Consigliere
Machinehead
Fox Mafia Consigliere
And yet, people LOVED his exciting system when he first came on.
I don't care how skilled your defensemen are. Or how quick of skaters they are. It is impossible to win with AV's defensive strategy. Unless, you have a world class goaltender who stands on his head pretty much every night.
Machinehead
Fox Mafia Consigliere
The 13-14 and 14-15 teams were exciting, but they still had a lot of Torts habits. In particular, those teams could cycle for hours.
I think the last three seasons, which is almost all players exclusively coached by AV as Rangers, have been extremely boring.
I always love hearing about how he needs the right roster or "AV type" players.
This is all I can think of that fits his style
I love your consistent unwillingness to accept the personnel nosedive this franchise has taken since 2015-2016. Even now, with the Rangers fielding the Hartford Wolfpack roster, you still find the need to attack the system. It is truly a sight to behold.
A more nuanced and appropriate argument is AV's rigid insistence on his system during this pronounced drain of talent on the roster. But that's not what you're saying. You're pushing the twisted demagoguery that AV's system never worked, even though its quite clearly did with better players early in his tenure.
I love your consistent ignoring of the fact that these issues have existed far before the drop off in talent. Hank was just capable of covering up those breakdowns way more often than he has been able to the last 3 seasons.
You're 2nd paragraph is closer to being right, but his system has always sucked. Did the system clearly work, or was Lundqvist really just that good? Heres a hint, its the latter.
And before you respond with the "He plays the system because of Lundqvist!" just realize that it's a dumb argument. There is no coach in this league who isn't a blithering moron who is willingly going to play a style that results in significant high danger chances against. Its one thing if they took one to give two, but it's more like they take five to give one and if their goalie doesn't stand on his head, they're usually KO'd by the end of the 1st (see: Last night.)
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
There are plenty of examples of problems with the system, but the one where the winger decides to cover the center’s responsibility when the center is already doing it is not one of them.
Machinehead
Fox Mafia Consigliere
I love your consistent unwillingness to accept that the results have been the same for years under radically different rosters
This is the first year of Hank's career that he's posted a negative Goals Saved Above Average and look where the team is.
The only difference between this and 2015-16 when they had McDonagh, Stepan, Brassard, Nash, Yandle, Boyle, E. Staal, and Girardi as that Hank posted an absurd +24.96 GSAA. This year, it's -0.6.
Weird. One would think that the Rangers would've made regular trips to the finals and secure President's trophies in the 9 years Lundqvist was the goalie preceding AV.
Or, it could be that argument is opportunistic and half-baked.
- Aug 5, 2010
- 13,886
- 9,516
Not all situations can match a perfect theory.
Do you see two Caps at the top of the screen? Rangers are already in trouble getting back so the puck carrier can't be (tightly) covered by RD since he needs to worry about these two. So it's LD and C who should stay with the puck carrier while LW should stay on his side and it's Hayes.
This is your counterpoint? Really?
I do not deny that the quality of the players playing defense is fairly sub par now as an overall. HOWEVER:
Do you deny the fact that the defense has functioned the exact same way in each year of AV tenure? Do you deny that they are making the same mistakes? Do you deny that the names on the jerseys that are worn by the defensemen has changed, but that the same mistakes are made? Do you deny that AV has now had 3 different assistant coaches to handle the defense and yet the same mistakes are made? Do you deny the statistics that show how many high opportunity shots the Rangers surrender (not now, but in the past as well)? Do you deny the statement that for most of AV's tenure, Henke has been one of the best goaltenders in the world?
If you deny any of these, please list out the line item and rebut it.
He had way more to work with than either of his predecessors. That was true in 15-16 too when the team bowed out in the 1st round.
I don't think you'll find many people who had an issue with what he did during his inaugural season as Ranger coach. The guy shuffled the deck until the found the right combinations and stuck with them (with a roster that was mostly put together before he even got the job, might I add.) The playoff turtles were tough to watch, but turtle or not I don't think they beat LA unless they got the bounces they didn't get and Dan O'Hallaran doesn't forget how to do his job - They lost to a better team and I think most of us were okay with that.
They won the Presidents trophy on the back of their goaltenders. Sure they scored a ton, but lets not pretend like both Hank and Talbot didn't have to be superhuman at times in order to squeeze out wins. Everything that he did well in his first season dissipated after that, and the team has only further deteriorated ever since. Need I remind you this team got shut out in back to back home games because AV was way to stubborn to change things up that weren't working.
Or how about how he had Tanner Glass out on the ice against the Stamkos line in both games 5 and 7 for the winning goals against? Or Tanner Glass playing over superior players at all?
This is before his debacle in the playoffs last year.
I don't understand how anyone can defend this dude and I don't think you understand it either, because you haven't made any sense.
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
Guys, you can’t separate the quality of the team from the performance of the coach. Every single thing the team does is a credit to the coach or a strike against him. That’s part of what coaching is about.
There are plenty of examples in history of highly talented and deep teams who don’t do well because of bad coaching. The Rangers under AV did for a while and that’s to his credit.
There are plenty of examples in history of highly talented and deep teams who don’t do well because of bad coaching. The Rangers under AV did for a while and that’s to his credit.
- Status
