All Encompassing Coaching and Glen Cigar Thread Part V

[Clown Fiesta]

Yes, Torts usually gets the most out of his rosters. Carl Hagelin, Mats Zuccarello, Ryan McDonagh, John Moore, Anton Stralman, Derrick Brassard, Ryan Callahan - all of those players were either not in the NHL or played a fringe role before Torts came over. Now all of those guys are top 6 players and top 6 defenders on the Rangers roster.

Ok so then add in the fact that we also have Stepan, Girardi, Nash, and Lundqvist and you have a majority of the roster which isn't garbage. So you basically said this team was garbage and then contradicted yourself by saying that all the players you listed weren't garbage, which yes Torts had a lot to do with. But now that he has an improved core and has had time to further develop them he's absolved of all failure?

 

[Trxjw]

Makes my head spin to see all of these "writers" and "reporters" talking about Tortorella's system in the same breath as the Bruins. Rangers play prevent defense in the defensive zone. They collapse the box towards Hank. The Bruins stand up in the neutral zone and play high-pressure D in their own end. They can also transition the puck up the ice effectively.

A PP coach isn't going to fix this team. I'm not even sure Torts can change the system and rebuild a working relationship with the players. I've been saying it all year. Great coaches adapt to what they have. They don't try and force something to work when it clearly isn't effective.

 

[Clown Fiesta]

If Torts shows a willingness to adjust his system to be more effective at sustaining pressure and breaking out of our own zone so we don't get hemmed in constantly I'm ok with him coming back for next season. He is a good coach, but his stubbornness is what really bugs me.

If we go out and try get more Torts guys and his system doesn't work and the team is flailing half way through the season and he gets let go I am going to be pissed with what he leaves for the next coach to work with.

 

[Jabroni]

Makes my head spin to see all of these "writers" and "reporters" talking about Tortorella's system in the same breath as the Bruins. Rangers play prevent defense in the defensive zone. They collapse the box towards Hank. The Bruins stand up in the neutral zone and play high-pressure D in their own end. They can also transition the puck up the ice effectively.

A PP coach isn't going to fix this team. I'm not even sure Torts can change the system and rebuild a working relationship with the players. I've been saying it all year. Great coaches adapt to what they have. They don't try and force something to work when it clearly isn't effective.

The relationship doesn't work now?

 

[Kreider Typical]

Makes my head spin to see all of these "writers" and "reporters" talking about Tortorella's system in the same breath as the Bruins. Rangers play prevent defense in the defensive zone. They collapse the box towards Hank. The Bruins stand up in the neutral zone and play high-pressure D in their own end. They can also transition the puck up the ice effectively.

A PP coach isn't going to fix this team. I'm not even sure Torts can change the system and rebuild a working relationship with the players. I've been saying it all year. Great coaches adapt to what they have. They don't try and force something to work when it clearly isn't effective.

the problem is definitely adapting(pierre mcguire!), but w/o actually doing that an improved powerplay could end up giving us confidence (albeit every time our PP worked this year we end up not getting another pp for at least 40 minutes)... confidence plays such a big role on this team-- especially when the fans boo you as soon as you go a minute on the pp with no success... at least last year we had a working pk to feed off of.

coaching changes need to happen... idk if it's firing torts or adding somebody, but i'm not confident in the personnel we have right now

 

[Clown Fiesta]

If I'm Sather I force Torts into taking a 2nd assistant on the bench, for the sole purpose of running the PP. He doesn't even have to invite him out to dinner with the other coaches if he doesn't want to.

 

[Kershaw]

Brassard played what exactly? A season and a half under Hitchcock when he was just breaking into the league and suffered two season ending shoulder surgeries? Players grow. Brassard is a type of player that thrives on holding onto the puck and making plays. If you can't see that you're blind. I don't give two ***** what Corsi/Fenwick says. Youre all taking a "puck possession" system and thinking it means Corsi/Fenwick. Aren't those based on shots for/against? If anything, our shots for will go down under a system like that. Columbus sucked all those years. Of course those two players are going to have horrible puck possession stats. Corsi and Fenwick can be useful when in context. You're not taking the situation into context. Nash, although skeptical if it would be an easy transition for him, would love a puck possession system. He would spend less time hunting down the puck forechecking, relying on the other team to make a mistake and more time catching clean passes and/or having the puck on his stick. Wouldn't you want that?

Puck possession is directly correlated to Fenwick/Corsi. The top teams in those categories (Usually LAK, Chicago, STL, Boston) are the best puck possession teams in the league.

Nash and Brassard had terrible Corsi ratings relative to talent on their roster (CorsiRelQOC). This means other players like Methot, Pahlsson, Doresett and Umberger in 2010-11 were more efficient shot differential wise. These stats, like you said don't tell the whole picture. But they picture trends and likely outcome prediction on the future. During their team in CBJ, Nash and Brassard was inefficient players, meaning they allowed as many shots on net as they attempted relative to their talent level. That in my opinion, does not sustain puck possession at all, hence why I think the system won't work with these group of players.

Callahan is one of the few that would absolutely suck in a puck possession system. There you go, I said it, but one person does not define a team, captain or not. He doesn't have the poise or smarts to slow up and wait for a better play. He always wants to go 110% balls to the wall for better or worse. Which is not by any means a bad quality, but it does have it's downsides. Stop stat watching.

Callahan was one of the better possession players relative to competition on the Rangers in 10-11. That whole Dubi-AA-Callahan line was a very formidable top line on that weak Rangers roster. Probably carried by Dubinsky, who had a career season that year and has always been one of the best puck possession players in the league.

Richards, I agree, but why does that even matter? He will be gone.

You've got it all wrong. One person does not make a puck possession team. It's a coaches mentality. Just like one person did not make up the shot blocking strategy last year. It was a team effort. Otherwise you could say "oh well they still have an elite blocking forward in Callahan and an elite blocking defenseman in Girardi so why wasn't it as good this year?"

One player can absolutely change the whole dynamics of a roster. A #1C that can dominate possession will send a trickle-down effect to the rest of the roster on easier line-matching. You can see this with the Wings this year, who's forward corps sans Zetterberg and Datsyuk are largely mediocre. A #1D like Karlsson will always be moving the puck away from own end, neutralizing other top 6 opponents with ease. This opens up better matchups for the rest of the roster.

Detroit STILL plays puck possession. No coincidence they're in the playoffs AND going far again. Do they have a true #1 D? Not with Lidstrom gone, unless you really think Kronwall is such a dynamite offensive wizard. As a matter of fact, every team left in the playoffs plays some type of puck possession system. If you don't think the Bruins play one (although its a very grinding one) why don't you go watch them embarrass us by breaking out using their D and the middle ice very easily while we try to jam the puck up the boards instead of moving it back to the D.

See previous post. Bruins play a strong puck possession system. Chara is their best CorsiRelQOC defenseman, Marchand-Bergeron-Seguin are amongst tops in CorsiRelQOC.

 

[NickyFotiu]

If I'm Sather I force Torts into taking a 2nd assistant on the bench, for the sole purpose of running the PP. He doesn't even have to invite him out to dinner with the other coaches if he doesn't want to.

The Knicks went through this type of thing with Dantoni. He had to be forced to hire a defensive coach. He also left Phoenix because they wanted to force him to hire one. If these coaches are too stubborn to address a annual problem then they should be replaced. In the best scenario our coach will actually understand how to run a PP and be the guy diagramming the power play as well as the end of game plays.

 

[haveandare]

If Torts shows a willingness to adjust his system to be more effective at sustaining pressure and breaking out of our own zone so we don't get hemmed in constantly I'm ok with him coming back for next season. He is a good coach, but his stubbornness is what really bugs me.

If we go out and try get more Torts guys and his system doesn't work and the team is flailing half way through the season and he gets let go I am going to be pissed with what he leaves for the next coach to work with.

Pretty much my feelings as well. If he's dead-set on keeping the same exact system, find someone new. If he's open to changing things up a bit, and frankly, I can't imagine why he wouldn't be, keep him around and see what he can come up with in the offseason.

 

[Clown Fiesta]

The Knicks went through this type of thing with Dantoni. He had to be forced to hire a defensive coach. He also left Phoenix because they wanted to force him to hire one. If these coaches are too stubborn to address a annual problem then they should be replaced. In the best scenario our coach will actually understand how to run a PP and be the guy diagramming the power play as well as the end of game plays.

Which would be fantastic, but if he's not able to do that for whatever reason just man up and say you need another assistant to run the PP. We definitely won't hold it against you Torts.

 

[aufheben]

If they do bring in someone new, I hope he brings a system that makes sense in front of the best goalie in the world. Collapsing D/shot blocking is for mediocore goalies. The best way to score on Hank is shots from the point through traffic, deflections, etc.*

*That doesn't mean pretend we're the Penguins/80's Oilers and leave Hank out to dry.

 

[Kershaw]

Love this post. Stat watching alone gets you nowhere. Nor does having his cake and trying to eat it too... It's the whole system of players and coaches. They need to all adapt to a different, more possessing style... like you said the rest of the playoff teams can keep the puck for a loooong time. And the Wings' Kronwall isn't some wizard. So yeah, agree with you. So long as we just jam and board the puck into the realms of dump and chase, we will have problems if that's our 1st strategy

"Stat watching" provides much more meaning than the usual biased viewings based on result oriented reaction system IMO.

 

[PlamsUnlimited]

"Stat watching" provides much more meaning than the usual biased viewings based on result oriented reaction system IMO.

So, basically what you said is that the printed numbers that may not completely accurately display the work of the team mean more than the observance of people who watch and have been around a while. Lol please, you grasp at straws and only argue where AS fits. If you're seeing bias then start paying more attention. You have it all wrong. I also like how you choose to leave out the bit where I said "alone". Please include the WHOLE argument. Not the parts you can weakly argue against only.

For example, if you are a stat watcher only, which you seem you are as you have the holier than thou attitude whenever you post here, you'd have to say that this year was better than last if you're looking only at AS. but you know, actual observance means nothing. Only you're right.

 

[Kershaw]

So, basically what you said is that the printed numbers that may not completely accurately display the work of the team mean more than the observance of people who watch and have been around a while. Lol please, you grasp at straws and only argue where AS fits. If you're seeing bias then start paying more attention. You have it all wrong. I also like how you choose to leave out the bit where I said "alone". Please include the WHOLE argument. Not the parts you can weakly argue against only.

For example, if you are a stat watcher only, which you seem you are as you have the holier than thou attitude whenever you post here, you'd have to say that this year was better than last if you're looking only at AS. but you know, actual observance means nothing. Only you're right.

Yeah, this has a lot to do with it. But again, both should be used with context.

 

[Cake or Death]

Brooks is on the money: http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/rangers/it_all_on_torts_6BJFtdSngaj0gwMePY37sJ

He is. Good read. Thanks

 

[Thirty One]

"Stat watching" provides much more meaning than the usual biased viewings based on result oriented reaction system IMO.

I agree that the primary advantage of statistics is that they are less subject to bias than viewing is.

That is only the case when you form your opinion after considering the statistical evidence, though. Selectively picking through advanced statistics as they suit your already-formed opinions, is spitting on the very scientific method that makes analytics useful.

 

[PlamsUnlimited]

Yeah, this has a lot to do with it. But again, both should be used with context.

I used it with that. "Stat watching alone" yet you chose to eliminate that to try to change the argument.

Also, in addition to your initial comment, why only choose a small group that shows bias instead of an objectively sound, larger, more heard group of fans?

 

[Kershaw]

I agree that the primary advantage of statistics is that they are less subject to bias than viewing is.

That is only the case when you form your opinion after considering the statistical evidence, though. Selectively picking through advanced statistics as they suit your already-formed opinions, is spitting on the very scientific method that makes analytics useful.

All of this is true and I agree with it. But a lot of the formed opinions come from the statistics in the first place.

 

[3rd Guy High]

....they had their best moments in open ice, creating on the rush ... when, that is, they were able to coherently clear the zone.....

The Rangers were a talent-driven team. Their identity had changed but the indoctrinated athletes could not bring themselves to acknowledge that, much less embrace it.....

But they do have some talent on the come. And talent still wins games.

It is on Tortorella to maximize that talent. He needs to coach the roster he has, not the one he wishes he had or the one he used to have.

Brooks says it perfectly, and this is what a puck possession system is about. Maximizing the use of open ice, and creating on the rush. Doesn't necessarily have to be a "quick strike" offense so to speak.

I really don't give a crap about Callahan or anyone's PAST Corsi/Fenwick stats, because that's exactly what they are. In the past. Brassard is a different player since arriving in New York, it has rejuvenated him. Anyone that watches the game could see that. He himself even admitted he's found a new passion for the game since arriving. I don't think it's fair to judge him OR Nash based on what they did in a defense-first system more than 3 years ago for Hitchcock.

If you really think Callahan would play better in a puck possession system than Brassard, you're a ****ing moron and there's no way around that. Watch them play. Brassard enters the zone and circles into open ice waiting for a late guy for support and/or to feed. Callahan gets the puck and skates straight down the boards deep into the zone and either drives to the net or skates behind it. I apologize for being so blunt but there's really no way around that. We have the horses on defense to let them go and attack. Moore and McDonagh are more than capable of getting back, and both of them have shown the ability to skate the puck out of our defensive zone and on the rush. If it causes one or two more odd-man rushes against us a game it's really not a big deal considering we give up a ton to begin with and we have the best goalie in the world behind us. The only one I don't want attacking is Girardi and I think that's fair.

 

[Kershaw]

I used it with that. "Stat watching alone" yet you chose to eliminate that to try to change the argument.

Also, in addition to your initial comment, why only choose a small group that shows bias instead of an objectively sound, larger, more heard group of fans?

There is little to no objectivity. A lot of defending of favorite players and bashing of disliked players. Case in point, Boyle scores the only Rangers goal in game 4 vs. the Capitals and gets blamed for the loss when taking penalty on Ribeiro as if it cancelled out his goal. Scapegoats/memes (Del Zaster/JAM) are used and it catches on with mainstream.

 

[Kershaw]

Brooks says it perfectly, and this is what a puck possession system is about. Maximizing the use of open ice, and creating on the rush. Doesn't necessarily have to be a "quick strike" offense so to speak.

I really don't give a crap about Callahan or anyone's PAST Corsi/Fenwick stats, because that's exactly what they are. In the past. Brassard is a different player since arriving in New York, it has rejuvenated him. Anyone that watches the game could see that. He himself even admitted he's found a new passion for the game since arriving. I don't think it's fair to judge him OR Nash based on what they did in a defense-first system more than 3 years ago for Hitchcock.

It is not fair to judge Brassard and Nash in a defense first Hitchcock system where they had mediocre defensive numbers, when they're playing a defense first system under Tortorella? Yeah Brassard's had a solid 20 games with the Rangers point production, but his past performance shows that his puck possession (shots directed) was weak relative to the rest of the CBJ roster. Anisimov and Dubinsky for example in same system under Todd Richards were fantastic players at gaining zone entries, working the cycles and generating shots on goal. Callahan was a good puck possession player in 10-11 because that Pack Line was really good at getting zone entry (Dubinsky) and working the boards, leading to large quantity of scoring chances.

If you really think Callahan would play better in a puck possession system than Brassard, you're a ****ing moron and there's no way around that. Watch them play. Brassard enters the zone and circles into open ice waiting for a late guy for support and/or to feed. Callahan gets the puck and skates straight down the boards deep into the zone and either drives to the net or skates behind it. I apologize for being so blunt but there's really no way around that. We have the horses on defense to let them go and attack. Moore and McDonagh are more than capable of getting back, and both of them have shown the ability to skate the puck out of our defensive zone and on the rush. If it causes one or two more odd-man rushes against us a game it's really not a big deal considering we give up a ton to begin with and we have the best goalie in the world behind us. The only one I don't want attacking is Girardi and I think that's fair.

For example, I think Callahan would work very well with the Blues and David Backes in particular at maintaining possession of the puck along the boards. You don't need natural hands to possess that quality. That's why big bulky players that can skate like Landeskog and Backes are amongst the best in CORSI ratings.

I can't believe I'm defending Callahan here lol.

I don't think we have the horses on defense. They have very little offensive zone IQ and use the boards to get the puck out instead of relying on center ice. Not an efficient strategy to move puck out of own zone with opposing pinching dmen. This is probably hockey IQ related. No QB stretch passes to send on odd man rushes like from a Markov or Prime Kaberle or Pronger or Neidermayer or Rafalski.

 

[essen]

I'm a Mets fan. Torts needs to go. The powerplay has sucked for years. The transition game, breakouts, and puck possession time are all terrible. The team has struggled to score for years despite offensively talented players on the roster. None of the young defensemen have bloomed offensively despite several (Del Zotto, McDonagh, Stralman, and now Moore) having tools to do so. He's completely inflexible. He's gotten basically whatever he's asked for with this roster and they still aren't contending.

He has no idea how, when, or what adjustments to make. If something's going wrong his process is never at fault. It's always completely on the players. It may be the players' jobs to execute, but it's his job to get them to execute. His system appears to frustrate his own players as much as it does their opponents.

I hate to do a post of this kind of format, but there are a lot of points I'd like to address. So let's get started:

The powerplay has sucked for years. The transition game, breakouts, and puck possession time are all terrible.

Does 2011-2012 just not exist anymore? The Rangers were absolutely the best team in the East and the Devils only surpassed them because they were the better team at the time. The main reason why I think it's Yankees fans who clamor for a change in coaching staff is because they're very impatient and just can't stand waiting for growth (as a Mets fan, I'm sure you understand the attitude. Nothing personal to you; I'm a Mets fan as well).

I do agree that the transition game and breakouts were terrible but it's only been like that this year. I don't think Torts is a stubborn guy and I hope he can fine-tune his system with the personnel he has to make the Rangers a better team like they were in 2011-2012.

The team has struggled to score for years despite offensively talented players on the roster. None of the young defensemen have bloomed offensively despite several (Del Zotto, McDonagh, Stralman, and now Moore) having tools to do so.

Does it really matter if they're "struggling to score" if they're winning games? They were so close to the President's Trophy last year and they were two games away from the Conference championship, six away from the Cup. I don't mind the team not being an offensive juggernaut as long as they're winning games.

Additionally, I think video games have tainted the idea of what it means for players to "progress" in the NHL. Because of these games, fans tend to think that all progress must be linear and forward with consistent increases in stats rather than the way progress actually is for most players: very streaky. I do agree Torts has hampered MDZ's offensive abilities by coaching him incorrectly, though. For the other three, I disagree; Stralman definitely turned it up during the playoffs, McD still has four goals on the season (and given that he had 15 assists, some of those goals were probably credited to somebody with a deflection in front), and Moore... well, I dunno about Moore. Still inconclusive on him. I like what I'm seeing, though.

He's completely inflexible. He's gotten basically whatever he's asked for with this roster and they still aren't contending.

It was the towards the end of the season... it's kinda hard to just re-work an entire system because you got the key pieces you need out of a trade. Now he has a full off-season to work with these players and he has the experience to know which mistakes he needs to work on from this season. I mean... I'm excited. It's your opinion that he's inflexible though; I don't really think so.

He has no idea how, when, or what adjustments to make. If something's going wrong his process is never at fault. It's always completely on the players. It may be the players' jobs to execute, but it's his job to get them to execute. His system appears to frustrate his own players as much as it does their opponents.

Meh, I have a different opinion; I don't really know how to argue this point. We'll see how it plays out in the future because I don't think Torts is getting fired this season, anyway. I'll remain optimistic and I'll give him one more season before I start clamoring for his job, just like this other poster said:

Jets and Rangers . Torts has until next year to fix this abysmal PP and offense. Good coaches figure it out. We were beat soundly all season on both ends of the ice very frequently imo

 

[3rd Guy High]

It is not fair to judge Brassard and Nash in a defense first Hitchcock system where they had mediocre defensive numbers, when they're playing a defense first system under Tortorella? Yeah Brassard's had a solid 20 games with the Rangers point production, but his past performance shows that his puck possession (shots directed) was weak relative to the rest of the CBJ roster. Anisimov and Dubinsky for example in same system under Todd Richards were fantastic players at gaining zone entries, working the cycles and generating shots on goal. Callahan was a good puck possession player in 10-11 because that Pack Line was really good at getting zone entry (Dubinsky) and working the boards, leading to large quantity of scoring chances.

Puck possession teams don't work the boards. I don't want a grinding possession team like Boston, that wouldn't fit the roster as we have it right now. I want one that thrives in open ice and finds open spots in the ice and moves it to our teammates in a place where they have a 70/30 puck battle for it. Sophisticated pond hockey of a sort. Play keep away.

I'm going to assume you haven't played hockey at a very high level, otherwise you would know exactly what I'm talking about.

For example, I think Callahan would work very well with the Blues and David Backes in particular at maintaining possession of the puck along the boards. You don't need natural hands to possess that quality. That's why big bulky players that can skate like Landeskog and Backes are amongst the best in CORSI ratings.

I can't believe I'm defending Callahan here lol.

I don't think we have the horses on defense. They have very little offensive zone IQ and use the boards to get the puck out instead of relying on center ice. Not an efficient strategy to move puck out of own zone with opposing pinching dmen. This is probably hockey IQ related. No QB stretch passes to send on odd man rushes like from a Markov or Prime Kaberle or Pronger or Neidermayer or Rafalski.

Callahan does not have the IQ to play in open ice and be patient enough to wait for a play to open up. He belongs more in a Boston type of system.

How do you know our D doesn't have the horses? Torts is a "glass and out" type of guy. He's never stretched our D to their potential. Using the boards everytime instead of using the middle of the ice is something that is coached. Each coach has their preference, and most adjust based on who they're playing. Tortorella prefers the boards and very rarely strays from that. I've seen it in stretches from McDonagh, MDZ, Stralman and Moore. Girardi can make a solid first pass, but not much more than that.

 

[Kershaw]

Puck possession teams don't work the boards. I don't want a grinding possession team like Boston, that wouldn't fit the roster as we have it right now. I want one that thrives in open ice and finds open spots in the ice and moves it to our teammates in a place where they have a 70/30 puck battle for it. Sophisticated pond hockey of a sort. Play keep away.

Beggars can not be choosers. The Rangers roster simply isn't constructed to run a puck possession system due to the lack of high-end talent amongst skaters. They do not have a Datsyuk or Zetterberg to patrol the middle of the ice, nor do they have the big body players like Backes and Berglund to eat up pucks on forecheck. They are mediocre in both of those aspects, hence my questioning of this team being able to run possession system.

Every hockey club wants that type of system to win 70/30 puck battles, only the elite teams (LAK, CHI, BOS, PIT, STL) can actually do so consistently. And that is exactly what makes them elite teams.

I'm going to assume you haven't played hockey at a very high level, otherwise you would know exactly what I'm talking about.

I did not play hockey at a very high level, but I fail to see why that matters.

Callahan does not have the IQ to play in open ice and be patient enough to wait for a play to open up. He belongs more in a Boston type of system.

Exactly. The Boston Bruins, have a mixed balance of lines, despite not being overly skilled (arguable), they still run a puck possession system. Milan Lucic, Nathan Horton, David Krejci have great possession numbers due to dominance on the boards. Marchand-Bergeron-Seguin are very skilled and hold onto the puck a lot more then the opposing team. The other two bottom lines they have get sheltered minutes and look favorable against other bottom lines.

How do you know our D doesn't have the horses? Torts is a "glass and out" type of guy. He's never stretched our D to their potential. Using the boards everytime instead of using the middle of the ice is something that is coached. Each coach has their preference, and most adjust based on who they're playing. Tortorella prefers the boards and very rarely strays from that. I've seen it in stretches from McDonagh, MDZ, Stralman and Moore. Girardi can make a solid first pass, but not much more than that.

He has to retort to that system due to lack of personnel/offensive talent on the back end. I've rarely seen Ranger defenseman grab the puck, look up, and fire a pass across center ice to set a player off on an odd man rush from middle of the ice. Only special players can do this with consistency and the Rangers unfortunately have not had one since Brian Leetch. This is only considering stretch passes BTW. I see no reason why Torts should be preaching risky plays like those when they do not suit the strengths of the defensemen.

 

[stan the caddy]

If the Rangers want to be more of a "puck possesion" team the forwards have to play better defense. The Rangers backcheck sucked against Boston. I think the biggest reason why Gaborik was moved because he didn't do it at all this season.

The Rangers need a dman that can hit the net consistently. Especially one that can shoot off the pass. Puck in deep and quick shots from the point. Krug and Green killed the Rangers. The Rangers don't have a threat like that.