Alain Vigneault

[5 4 Fighting]

And what happens to Richards?

Good question, I say bench his weak ass. Or switch with Moore. No way am I giving him playoff Brassard's ice time.

 

[True Blue]

No, this was not predictable. A few Rangers fans here just wanted to lament about the "aging star" curse and talk about how it would be like all the rest. MSL was a ****ing PPG before coming here and no reasonable fan would have seen this epic slump coming. Clinging to some superstition about the Rangers and older players with talent does not make this situation predictable. It was not a reasonable position then and it still isn't. Any other fans of any other team in the league would have been collectively crapping their pants over trading for a currently PPG star winger at the deadline. It's irrational and short-sighted to call this predictable.

I really do not want to hijack this thread into another MSL discussion. But how predictable? Look at Sather's trades for aging vets. And then tell me how it is "superstition". Oh, and the "predictable" part was when people would begin to look for other players who need to jump start said aging star player. Looking for reasons for poor play. Not this type or that type of linemate. Not being placed on proper line. All reasons for poor play other than the actual poor play of said aging star player.

Also how is AV's style not conducive to playoff success? He took a team to the SCF. Just stop. You don't make any sense.

What was Vancouver's history in the playoffs with him?

 

[Jersey Girl]

Any other fans of any other team in the league would have been collectively crapping their pants over trading for a currently PPG star winger at the deadline.

But good 'ol Marty decided the New York Rangers were the only team he wanted to be traded to. Lucky us.

 

[McRanger]

I really do not want to hijack this thread into another MSL discussion. But how predictable? Look at Sather's trades for aging vets. And then tell me how it is "superstition". Oh, and the "predictable" part was when people would begin to look for other players who need to jump start said aging star player. Looking for reasons for poor play. Not this type or that type of linemate. Not being placed on proper line. All reasons for poor play other than the actual poor play of said aging star player.

What was Vancouver's history in the playoffs with him?

Who was the last aging vet we traded for? Does Clowe count? He was 30. McCabe? Jody Shelley?

Who was the last one that wasn't a rental? Jagr? Mironov? Mike Dunham?

Not sure why the Rangers still have this reputation for trading for old players. That hasn't been their MO for over a decade.

St. Louis might fail here. But it wont be because of some nonexistent trend.

 

[True Blue]

Who was the last aging vet we traded for?

A 38 year old St. Louis.

St. Louis might fail here. But it wont be because of some nonexistent trend.

Tempting, but I will abstain from making an AV thread a redux of the MSL threads.

 

[Jersey Girl]

A 38 year old St. Louis.

Tempting, but I will abstain from making an AV thread a redux of the MSL threads.

Yeah, kinda weird that there is no thread where you are allowed to discuss St Louis - but I do understand why. Especially when you consider the success or failure of St Louis affects so many threads!

 

[McRanger]

A 38 year old St. Louis.

So you can predict St. Louis will fail based on the Rangers prior lack of success with trading for aging veterans, but really St. Louis, the guy you are projecting, is by himself the entire sample size.

Makes perfect sense.

Tempting, but I will abstain from making an AV thread a redux of the MSL threads.

The MSL threads were never about MSL. They were about Sather. Its the usual rejoicing over the possibility of him failing again that bleeds into every thread; posters thumbing their noses at the people who like our GM (Sather Fan Club, population:zero) and chastising anyone who might view a move favorably, independent of the man who made it.

At the end of the day that/those thread(s) would still be open if the arguments being made were even remotely coherent.

Complaining about Sather because of MSL is like saying Pol Pot was a bad guy because he chewed his food with his mouth open.

 

[Jersey Girl]

The MSL threads were never about MSL. They were about Sather.

Not true. The St Louis thread was about St Louis, although every trade will be discussed in relation to what was received/given up.

 

[True Blue]

At the end of the day that/those thread(s) would still be open if the arguments being made were even remotely coherent.

You are pro-trade, so to you the con arguments were not coherent. There were PLENTY of people who did not like the trade. So the arguments made perfect sense to us.

Complaining about Sather because of MSL is like saying Pol Pot was a bad guy because he chewed his food with his mouth open.

People are complaining about the MSL trade because it is viewed as a poor trade. People complain about Sather in the context of the MSL trade because it is viewed as yet another poor decision that he made.

 

[True Blue]

Not true. The St Louis thread was about St Louis, although every trade will be discussed in relation to what was received/given up.

I must confess that I am somewhat confused by the fact that there are claims that the dislike of the MSL trade is only disliked because Sather made it. Really makes me scratch my head.

Your comment is spot on.

Really....trying....hard....not.....to......hijack......this......thread......

 

[Levitate]

I must confess that I am somewhat confused by the fact that there are claims that the dislike of the MSL trade is only disliked because Sather made it. Really makes me scratch my head.

Your comment is spot on.

Really....trying....hard....not.....to......hijack......this......thread......

Your'e "trying" so hard but you keep posting about it over and over again

 

[True Blue]

Your'e "trying" so hard but you keep posting about it over and over again

True. I should probably stop that

 

[McRanger]

You are pro-trade, so to you the con arguments were not coherent. There were PLENTY of people who did not like the trade. So the arguments made perfect sense to us.

I'm pro trade? That is interesting. My reaction to the trade was not exactly favorable.

I am pro-St. Louis. I think he is a fantastic player. And I believe anyone who thinks otherwise, regardless of what we've seen the last few weeks, is touched in the head.

People are complaining about the MSL trade because it is viewed as a poor trade. People complain about Sather in the context of the MSL trade because it is viewed as yet another poor decision that he made.

I must confess that I am somewhat confused by the fact that there are claims that the dislike of the MSL trade is only disliked because Sather made it. Really makes me scratch my head.

Your comment is spot on.

Really....trying....hard....not.....to......hijack......this......thread......

If you say so. I see it as an excuse to turn every thread into a nonsensical and never ending b**ch fest.

We had less posts about the entire 2012 playoffs than we've had about St. Louis.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

The Rangers got away from trading for the old-aging superstar over the past decade or so, before the MSL trade, of course. Instead, they signed these same guys as free agents - and while 30/31/32 years old isn't ancient, we've been burned time and time again by acquiring players whose best days are behind them.

It happens for a whole host of reasons, chief among them being the lack of patience in NYC. When the stated goal is that you want to compete for the Stanley Cup every year, but theres no details/legwork on how you're going to get there, you'll keep getting these poorly constructed teams that Sather trots out there every season. Hes running out of assets to trade now, so it'll be fun to see what shortcut he takes next.

 

[haveandare]

I don't disagree that Richards and one of Boyle/Moore/Carcillo aren't exactly ideal linemates, but he has been tried out on several different lines. When he was put with Zucc/Brass, that line was a disaster in their own end. I would like to see Nash-Stepan-MSL tried out again, that line didn't get too much time together.

That being said, MSL has always been a catalyst, a player who drives the offense on his line. He hasn't been that, and I don't think his linemates are to blame.

Looks like we may get Nash - Step - MSL again tonight, which will be interesting.

I totally agree that his line mates aren't to blame. I'm just saying, he's here now, he has the potential to provide what the team needs, he can't be put on a waste of a line if anyone still has any hope of him being productive. AV has got to put him in a position to get him going. Not at the expense of other lines that are clicking, but Zucc's line and the fourth line seem to be the only ones that are really buzzing.

Also, I'm very happy to see Fast called up. Keep the fourth liners on the fourth line. They're good there.

 

[Raspewtin]

AV's style isn't successful in the playoffs, because they have the puck so much that they can't hit anyone . And are too busy scoring to start scrums. Darn.

I'm actually very confident about this team in the postseason. Don't think they'll win it all, but I see them escaping the Metro.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Good question, I say bench his weak ass. Or switch with Moore. No way am I giving him playoff Brassard's ice time.

Its one thing to not like the way a player is playing.

Its quite another thing to fool yourself into believing there are better options available that would allow for said player to be benched.

 

[Levitate]

I'm actually very confident about this team in the postseason. Don't think they'll win it all, but I see them escaping the Metro.

If Boston gets taken out before the ECF I'd say the Rangers have about as good a shot as any other team in the East at making it to the finals. It's really just going to come down to who gets hot in the playoffs IMO (which isn't surprising!). There are dangerous teams but they all generally have some flaws as well

True. I should probably stop that

Sorry I came off as a jerk there

 

[SnowblindNYR]

I remember when Rangers fans thought we needed Torts' yelling and screaming to motivate the team. Some were worried about AV's calm demeanor. Yesterday we played the team with the 3rd/4th best record in the NHL, a 100 point team in Montreal, without our top pairing, without one of our best forwards who was heating up, and without arguably the best goalie in the NHL, with NOTHING to play for, while playing a team with a lot on the line and they really played their hearts out. Would have won if Diaz shot the puck another half an inch towards the goal or Pouliot hit the empty net. Maybe yelling and screaming is overrated and AV is just a good coach?

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

I remember when Rangers fans thought we needed Torts' yelling and screaming to motivate the team. Some were worried about AV's calm demeanor. Yesterday we played the team with the 3rd/4th best record in the NHL, a 100 point team in Montreal, without our top pairing, without one of our best forwards who was heating up, and without arguably the best goalie in the NHL, with NOTHING to play for, while playing a team with a lot on the line and they really played their hearts out. Would have won if Diaz shot the puck another half an inch towards the goal or Pouliot hit the empty net. Maybe yelling and screaming is overrated and AV is just a good coach?

Or maybe they're both good coaches that took flawed rosters to the max of their abilities. You know, this is a strange time to gloat about the coaching, considering this team hasn't played a playoff game yet and wasn't exactly a dominant force all season - especially against tougher competition.

Vigneault did a good job. Torts did a good job. They did it in different ways with some serious holes in the roster. Maybes its less about coaching, and more about constructing a roster thats cup worthy.

 

[Beacon]

AV has a better roster. The addition of MZA, Kreider, Pouliot, Brass, Dorsett, Carcillo, Moore and Diaz made this year's squad far superior to last year's. Notice that after the Gabby trade and MZA coming over, Torts also got better results.

Last year we had terrible depth, this year we have great depth.

 

[Raspewtin]

AV has a better roster. The addition of MZA, Kreider, Pouliot, Brass, Dorsett, Carcillo, Moore and Diaz made this year's squad far superior to last year's. Notice that after the Gabby trade and MZA coming over, Torts also got better results.

Last year we had terrible depth, this year we have great depth.

I'm not even remotely convinced that Torts would be getting as much from this roster as AV has.

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

I'm not even remotely convinced that Torts would be getting as much from this roster as AV has.

I don't think the overall results would be too much different, but I also don't think that Pouliot would still be on the roster if Torts were coach, and I think we would have given in to Callahan's contract demands as well, meaning no MSL. AV has begun to shape the team in his image, and I think his style of play is more conducive of winning a cup in this league, the way it is now, than Torts' style.

Honestly, I feel as though Torts has been declining as a coach the past few years. He had an absolute disaster of a first year with the Canucks, and I was less than impressed with his overall body of work last year.

I really am sick of talking about Tortorella and comparing the two, though.

 

[Raspewtin]

I don't think the overall results would be too much different, but I also don't think that Pouliot would still be on the roster if Torts were coach, and I think we would have given in to Callahan's contract demands as well, meaning no MSL. AV has begun to shape the team in his image, and I think his style of play is more conducive of winning a cup in this league, the way it is now, than Torts' style.

Honestly, I feel as though Torts has been declining as a coach the past few years. He had an absolute disaster of a first year with the Canucks, and I was less than impressed with his overall body of work last year.

I really am sick of talking about Tortorella and comparing the two, though.

I think this roster would definitely look different. I say Torts wouldn't get much out of these players because they aren't his types. He'd have sent Pouliot and Zucc through waivers if he could after a week. Kreider would probably still be in the AHL. McDonagh wouldn't have 1/3rd of his points. Callahan would as you said probably still be here on a ridiculous contract, DZ would probably still be here, etc. These just aren't his players, he likes blue collar players.

He was just the wrong hire by the Canucks.

It was fun while it lasted but now it's just annoying. Torts is gone and is really starting to suck as a coach. Doubt he has a job past next season.

 

[Ola]

AV's style isn't successful in the playoffs, because they have the puck so much that they can't hit anyone . And are too busy scoring to start scrums. Darn.

I'm actually very confident about this team in the postseason. Don't think they'll win it all, but I see them escaping the Metro.

I am very confident that -- this is the way to play -- in the postseason.

I want to see us get it done for at least one round though before I am confident that we are ready to play in the PO's though.

Like, you know, things just get exposed in the PO's. You need not go back very far to find that this team had serious flaws in how we played. And it definitely does not feel like we have settled in yet. I mean, it just takes so little for a series in the PO's to go south. Think of our PO in 06' as an example. We lost that series in like 45 minutes against NJ, a team that we was just better than. We pwned them that regular season, we pwned them the regular season after, and in the PO's the year after that. We started that G1 well, then gave up a goal late in first, and 2 more in a hurry early in the 2nd, and then the series was over after JJ lost it and blew his shoulder.

Philly is a great team to pour it on for stretches. They have problems with being consistent and keeping the foot on the gas. The can be exposed defensively. If they could rattle us and get on top, are we confident enough, sound enough in all areas of our game, to fight us back in it without giving something up? Can we rule out that we won't loose a crazy G1 and then play real well in G2 but get behind because of -- one -- misstake and not be able to fight us back in it? I am a bit afraid of a scenario somewhat like that.