All Encompassing Tortorella..ella..ella..eh..eh...and Glen Cigar Thread Part III
- Thread starter Inferno
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
- Status
Kel Varnsen
Below: Nash's Heart
- Sep 27, 2009
- 3,554
- 0
Whiplash27
Quattro!!
No one denies that Boyle tries hard, but the odds of him scoring is extremely slim. When you need a goal, he's not the guy you want to see out there.
The best time to complain about Boyle is when he plays well, and is one of the best forwards on the ice.
I liked when the other guys were out and Toronto was coming down the ice in droves instead.
NYR Sting
Heart and Soul
Okay, so before we even start debating some of the teams you, one of the most negative guys on Sather, put in there we're at worst top ten in the league and top 3 in the East.
And yet Sather is completely inept. Someone has a real sense of entitlement...
Sense of entitlement? You think a fan having a desire for their team to be an elite team, especially when they haven't been an elite team in nearly 20 years, is entitled? For Sather, it has been 8 years since the lockout, and 13 years total. At what point are we better than top ten? How long does this master plan take?
IMO, Boyle being one of the best forwards on the ice this evening says more about the rest of the forwards on the team than it does about Boyle. Even when Boyle plays this well, which isn't often, he's still a poor offensive player.
Boyle would fit in on a Team with a high scoring offense (ala Pitt).....because all he does is neutralize everything on the ice. He has Zero offensive skills. No hands. and a Big body that he does not use correctly. But he does waste time and neutralize his linemates quite effectively. So protecting a lead, or just needing a body to waste time for a few shifts......he could be very effective on a Team like that.
Just not so much on our offensively challenged team.....where we need offense from anyplace and anyone who could even be capable of providing some. Boyle just doesn't fit that bill. Unfortunately, he is one of Torts faves........
Just not so much on our offensively challenged team.....where we need offense from anyplace and anyone who could even be capable of providing some. Boyle just doesn't fit that bill. Unfortunately, he is one of Torts faves........
Kel Varnsen
Below: Nash's Heart
- Sep 27, 2009
- 3,554
- 0
Desire is different than outright expectation. You talk like the ultimate success has been owed to you for some reason. You have demonstrated a lack of respect towards how difficult it is to be elite year in and year out. And how hard it is to win a cup. You don't seem to appreciate that every other team has sentient beings making roster decisions with the ultimate goal being directly at odds with our ultimate goal. You don't seem to respect that a handful of those teams you mentioned got to where they are today due to a prolonged period of total incompetence that we haven't had. Or a team like the pens, a combination of total incompetence and sheer "luck" in being gifted a generational player.
Last edited:
JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK
Twenty f*ckin years
- Oct 8, 2010
- 80,014
- 17,626
With the budget we have, we should at least be doing what Philadelphia does - going to the playoffs nearly every season. It's gotten better post-lockout, but we're generally finishing in 6th-8th. We've finished higher than that twice in 7 years. Definition of mediocrity.
I like the core of this team. I don't feel confident in Sather putting together the right pieces to complete it. I do like the last two moves the team made - the Clowe trade, and the Brassard/Moore/Dorsett trade. I honesty think, though, that these moves were mostly handled by Gorton - unlike the Nash trade, where I felt Sather was the main advocate of that move.
I like the core of this team. I don't feel confident in Sather putting together the right pieces to complete it. I do like the last two moves the team made - the Clowe trade, and the Brassard/Moore/Dorsett trade. I honesty think, though, that these moves were mostly handled by Gorton - unlike the Nash trade, where I felt Sather was the main advocate of that move.
Last edited:
Ryan McDonut
Registered User
meh, even when hes the best player on the ice he still can't score. love the effort and i wish he played like that more often, but hes just not an offensive player. period.
NYR Sting
Heart and Soul
People like us built the opportunity that allows these people to collect absurd amounts of money for providing a form of entertainment. The diehard affection for sports teams from fans like us created the culture that paved the way for these teams to cash big checks. I've spent money, to varying degrees, for most of my life on it. The amount of money continues to go up, and the prices are higher than most competitors around the league. The least the team could do to pay back the fans is make an honest, earnest effort to entertain, the one thing they are being paid to provide.
Perhaps for you entertainment is watching any human being wearing a Rangers jersey do just about anything on that Garden ice. Maybe you live for the cinderella story. Maybe you love cheering for underdogs. For me, that isn't the case. Underdogs are nice, and once in a while, that's fun, but that can't be the case every time. I want to watch great hockey, and I want a team that puts itself in a position to be one of the best as often as possible. I'm not alone. Occasionally, fans who share that opinion deserve to have those requests fulfilled.
"Year in and year out," he says. Surely, you jest, for when exactly was the last time this team was elite? We have had year, not years. One year, where this team was arguably elite. Winning a cup is no doubt hard, and it should be hard. Winning a cup isn't what we as fans are owed. What the fans deserve, and should at least occasionally receive from the teams that make absurd amounts of money off of that fandom, is a period of time where the team is in a strong position to compete for the Cup. Stretches of a few seasons in a row where the team plays great, world-class hockey that warrants the exorbitant price of admission for a ticket, or any other financial transaction made in support of the club.You demonstrate a lack of respect for yourself. For me. For all of us. For the fans. There is no reason we don't occasionally deserve a high quality product. Why other team's fans and not us?
Under Glen Sather, we have never had that.
You don't seem to appreciate that the sentient being in charge of making decisions for this club has been a failure of historic proportions. That only one other peer in the last 20 years has come anywhere remotely close to doing as poor a job for as long a time. You don't seem to appreciate that in the long and largely pathetic history of this franchise, this sentient being stands out as one of the single worst things to ever happen to this team.
Luck? Glen Sather should have been fired 3 or 4 times over at this point. He faces virtually no accountability. He "lucked" into probably the best, most consistent goalie of this generation. He "lucked" into having a blank check at his disposal for operating the team, even with the "constraints" of a salary cap, yet all he has managed to do with this enormous leg up over the competition is "luck" into a way to constantly get rid of his frequent and egregious blunders, blunders that almost always lead to the dismissal of his peers.
But Sather never gets dismissed, so he can take as long as he wants. He can throw **** against the wall enough times until finally he finds one that sticks, and people like you will sing his praises, caring little that by the time he finds one just sticky enough, likely 15 years, 10 since the lockout, will have passed. Not bothered at all by the fact that he has been provided with resources and opportunities that few people in his position ever are, and that he has been given more time than any of his peers ever have. Not bothered at all that this man has been running the team for 13 years, and in all that time, we haven't seen an instance of world class hockey.
The luck doesn't even end there. The location makes his team a draw for a lot of players. Heck, he's even in the almost perpetually weaker conference. This all, of course, saying nothing about the incredible good fortune upon which he "built" his entire reputation. He's been plenty lucky, and yet he repeatedly proves that he is totally unqualified to perform some of the most rudimentary elements of his job, because he so often fails at these aspects of his position.
Sather is the poster boy for incompetence. His tenure with the team has been nothing but total incompetence. A tortoise-paced ascent into the area teetering between mediocrity and "not good enough." Do you really need to be one of those supermen, those Gods of Olympus, the NHL GMs, to see that it is incredibly difficult to go all the way one year, much less have a chance to do so consistently over a number of years, without several top level offensive talents? That elite players tend to give you the best chance to win?
It isn't easy to build a good team, and it definitely requires some luck, but by no means is it impossible. The formula has been laid out quite clearly. Look at the NBA. The Spurs got incredibly lucky with the chance to draft Tim Duncan, but they did so much more than just get lucky. They out drafted, out developed, and out coached virtually every team in the league. They ran circles around the league for over a decade, which is coincidentally about how long it took some of the totally inept teams run by the NBA GMs, those MENSA equivalents, to realize, "hey, maybe we should start doing the things that the Spurs do, and maybe we'll be even half as good as they are." You'd think they'd have figured that out after the first few years, but then again, doing things the Spurs way required thinking about the game in a way that was a little bit too "advanced" for some of these so-called experts running NBA teams. Now you look around the NBA, and half the teams in the league feature high ranking front office and coaching positions held by folks with ties to the Spurs front office and coaching staff.
The NHL is not much different in this regard. The formula is there. Acquire some world class players, and give yourself an extended chance to win. You have GMs who repeatedly do things that clearly conflict with the formula, and Glen Sather is one of the biggest examples of this. Now, if you want to limit yourself in the ways you're willing to get those players, fine. But then you also have to be held accountable if you can't get them or produce results within the limits that have been set.
There is nothing wrong with rebuilding. It's the entire point of having drafts! If you want to win, you need to have some of the best players. But you know what? If you are going to refuse to go what is clearly the most direct route toward success, does that mean you deserve to be measured by lower expectations or standards? The team limited itself (supposedly), so they better find a different method to get it done. And if Glen Sather can't do that, which he obviously hasn't been able to yet, then someone else should be given the opportunity to try. Or should one man be allowed to make mistake after mistake after mistake, fail to produce results year after year after year, and just keep getting more and more opportunities?
How many years should a fanbase have to wait to get something in return for their investment? How long do we have to wait before our investment pays off?
Kel Varnsen
Below: Nash's Heart
- Sep 27, 2009
- 3,554
- 0
People like us built the opportunity that allows these people to collect absurd amounts of money for providing a form of entertainment. The diehard affection for sports teams from fans like us created the culture that paved the way for these teams to cash big checks. I've spent money, to varying degrees, for most of my life on it. The amount of money continues to go up, and the prices are higher than most competitors around the league. The least the team could do to pay back the fans is make an honest, earnest effort to entertain, the one thing they are being paid to provide.
Perhaps for you entertainment is watching any human being wearing a Rangers jersey do just about anything on that Garden ice. Maybe you live for the cinderella story. Maybe you love cheering for underdogs. For me, that isn't the case. Underdogs are nice, and once in a while, that's fun, but that can't be the case every time. I want to watch great hockey, and I want a team that puts itself in a position to be one of the best as often as possible. I'm not alone. Occasionally, fans who share that opinion deserve to have those requests fulfilled.
You demonstrate a lack of respect for yourself. For me. For all of us. For the fans. There is no reason we don't occasionally deserve a high quality product. Why other team's fans and not us?
Under Glen Sather, we have never had that.
You don't seem to appreciate that the sentient being in charge of making decisions for this club has been a failure of historic proportions. That only one other peer in the last 20 years has come anywhere remotely close to doing as poor a job for as long a time. You don't seem to appreciate that in the long and largely pathetic history of this franchise, this sentient being stands out as one of the single worst things to ever happen to this team.
Luck? Glen Sather should have been fired 3 or 4 times over at this point. He faces virtually no accountability. He "lucked" into probably the best, most consistent goalie of this generation. He "lucked" into having a blank check at his disposal for operating the team, even with the "constraints" of a salary cap, yet all he has managed to do with this enormous leg up over the competition is "luck" into a way to constantly get rid of his frequent and egregious blunders, blunders that almost always lead to the dismissal of his peers.
But Sather never gets dismissed, so he can take as long as he wants. He can throw **** against the wall enough times until finally he finds one that sticks, and people like you will sing his praises, caring little that by the time he finds one just sticky enough, likely 15 years, 10 since the lockout, will have passed. Not bothered at all by the fact that he has been provided with resources and opportunities that few people in his position ever are, and that he has been given more time than any of his peers ever have. Not bothered at all that this man has been running the team for 13 years, and in all that time, we haven't seen an instance of world class hockey.
The luck doesn't even end there. The location makes his team a draw for a lot of players. Heck, he's even in the almost perpetually weaker conference. This all, of course, saying nothing about the incredible good fortune upon which he "built" his entire reputation. He's been plenty lucky, and yet he repeatedly proves that he is totally unqualified to perform some of the most rudimentary elements of his job, because he so often fails at these aspects of his position.
Sather is the poster boy for incompetence. His tenure with the team has been nothing but total incompetence. A tortoise-paced ascent into the area teetering between mediocrity and "not good enough." Do you really need to be one of those supermen, those Gods of Olympus, the NHL GMs, to see that it is incredibly difficult to go all the way one year, much less have a chance to do so consistently over a number of years, without several top level offensive talents? That elite players tend to give you the best chance to win?
It isn't easy to build a good team, and it definitely requires some luck, but by no means is it impossible. The formula has been laid out quite clearly. Look at the NBA. The Spurs got incredibly lucky with the chance to draft Tim Duncan, but they did so much more than just get lucky. They out drafted, out developed, and out coached virtually every team in the league. They ran circles around the league for over a decade, which is coincidentally about how long it took some of the totally inept teams run by the NBA GMs, those MENSA equivalents, to realize, "hey, maybe we should start doing the things that the Spurs do, and maybe we'll be even half as good as they are." You'd think they'd have figured that out after the first few years, but then again, doing things the Spurs way required thinking about the game in a way that was a little bit too "advanced" for some of these so-called experts running NBA teams. Now you look around the NBA, and half the teams in the league feature high ranking front office and coaching positions held by folks with ties to the Spurs front office and coaching staff.
The NHL is not much different in this regard. The formula is there. Acquire some world class players, and give yourself an extended chance to win. You have GMs who repeatedly do things that clearly conflict with the formula, and Glen Sather is one of the biggest examples of this. Now, if you want to limit yourself in the ways you're willing to get those players, fine. But then you also have to be held accountable if you can't get them or produce results within the limits that have been set.
There is nothing wrong with rebuilding. It's the entire point of having drafts! If you want to win, you need to have some of the best players. But you know what? If you are going to refuse to go what is clearly the most direct route toward success, does that mean you deserve to be measured by lower expectations or standards? The team limited itself (supposedly), so they better find a different method to get it done. And if Glen Sather can't do that, which he obviously hasn't been able to yet, then someone else should be given the opportunity to try. Or should one man be allowed to make mistake after mistake after mistake, fail to produce results year after year after year, and just keep getting more and more opportunities?
How many years should a fanbase have to wait to get something in return for their investment? How long do we have to wait before our investment pays off?
I don't know why you bother breaking up my post when you always then fail to respond to any of it. You equivocate more than a D average philosophy student.
I used luck in a very narrow sense. Just that the pens were gifted crosby. That was luck at best, collusion at worst. But lets leave it at luck. You then used luck to define EVERYTHING that EVER went right for us. That's absurd. So stop talking luck. Good late round drafting isn't luck, good scouting isn't luck, being in NY isn't luck. That's good decision making, good personal, and good location, respectively.
When were we elite? Last ****ing year.
Every fanbase has fans who part with their money to watch their team. That money isn't conditional on the team being elite. Of course they all try, but by definition they all can't succeed. How do you not get that? What makes you more important than the huge panthers fan out there? What a ****ing entitlement streak you've got going. We all want to see the Rangers constantly be elite, or at least have a little run there. We're just not all babies about it, thinking that just because we want something it should or it will automatically happen.
Nac Mac Feegle
wee & free
- Jun 10, 2011
- 35,791
- 10,339
NYR Sting responded to your post, and quite eloquently, I might add.
Can you be any more condescending to people with valid concerns?
Of course it does, and of course he is.
My major problem is that theres an overbearing belief on this board that you cant be an effective player unless you consistently chip in offensively.
NYR Viper
Registered User
Offense is everything for some people because they stare at the stat-line. People believe the 4th line should be scoring 40 points a season when that is just not the case in reality. Unfortunately, many people do not live in that reality.
Rabid Ranger
2 is better than one
No kidding. People need to give their head a shake on expected point production. It's tough for first-liners to score in the NHL today much less 4th liners. A guy like Brian Boyle has a role to play and he doesn't sufficently that he has the coach's confidence. Coaches lean on "their guys" all the time, even if the trust is inexplicable. To me, there are bigger concerns than what Brian Boyle is or isn't doing on the ice.
NYR Viper
Registered User
What I find funny as well is that people complain about Boyle. Last year people complained Prust and Fedotenko were getting too much ice time. They leave. All of a sudden people clamor for them to be brought back. Oh No's!
zuckera1
#35
John Tortorella's resume:
Career Regular Season Record: 404-338-37-67 (.544)
Career Record w Rangers: 153-106-27 (.591)
Stanley Cup Champion (2004)
Jack Adams Award (03-04)
Most wins by any American born coach.
You would think that with this resume, Torts would earn more respect around here. Unfortunately that's not the case. Too many fans on this board give the players pass after pass, and instead blame Torts for all of our problems. When we win: the players are awesome. When we lose: it's all Torts' fault. If you're going to criticize Torts when he lose, then give him credit when we win. He's been a winner throughout his entire career. And for those of you who want him fired, please name a few acceptable replacements. Last year we were two goals away from the Stanley Cup finals (lost Game 5 by one goal, lost Game 6 in OT)...you would think that Torts would get a little leeway from our fanbase. Unfortunately he does not.
Career Regular Season Record: 404-338-37-67 (.544)
Career Record w Rangers: 153-106-27 (.591)
Stanley Cup Champion (2004)
Jack Adams Award (03-04)
Most wins by any American born coach.
You would think that with this resume, Torts would earn more respect around here. Unfortunately that's not the case. Too many fans on this board give the players pass after pass, and instead blame Torts for all of our problems. When we win: the players are awesome. When we lose: it's all Torts' fault. If you're going to criticize Torts when he lose, then give him credit when we win. He's been a winner throughout his entire career. And for those of you who want him fired, please name a few acceptable replacements. Last year we were two goals away from the Stanley Cup finals (lost Game 5 by one goal, lost Game 6 in OT)...you would think that Torts would get a little leeway from our fanbase. Unfortunately he does not.
NYR Sting
Heart and Soul
First of all, you haven't responded to a single point I've made in this post, and you never do. Your general approach is to put words in people's mouths, as you do later in this very post. I've asked one central question repeatedly throughout these posts, and you still haven't made even a cursory attempt to answer it.
Second of all, I broke up your post to illuminate how you fail to make any points. There wasn't anything to respond to, because sentence for sentence, it was full of ****. Please show me one instance of equivocation, which implies ambiguity. There isn't a morsel of ambiguity when it comes to my argument about Sather. Why would I need to be ambiguous? Virtually all of the evidence is on my side! There was absolutely no ambiguity when I laid out for you exactly how success is achieved based on trends in this league, and exactly how Glen Sather has failed to adhere to those trends, and as such, failed to achieve any success. Nothing ambiguous about it. Of course, you didn't respond to that point.
Oh, you don't have to explain that to me. I don't remember the last time I ever read anything from you that came across as anything but narrow.
No, I didn't. Once again, you're putting words in my mouth. Besides, where did "us" come from? I used luck to show you how many different things have gone right for Glen Sather, despite how many different things during Glen Sather's tenure have gone wrong for "us."
Elite is not one conference finals run. Elite is not going from barely making the playoffs, to the conference finals, to barely making the playoffs again. Last year was notable, but it wasn't elite.
No, the money isn't conditional on winning. It's just common decency from the business. You know, since we are providing them money in exchange for entertainment, that they provide entertainment. We have two very different ideas of trying, because I don't consider what the Rangers do to be trying to succeed. The sorts of decisions they routinely make clearly go against the logic that dictates success in this league. Regardless of that point, how do YOU not get that after a certain period of time, no matter how much one tries, if he fails to succeed, then he should be relieved of his duties so that someone else can attempt to succeed? How is that not clear? Plenty of people in business try, and when they fail, someone else tries. Usually, in this business, that timeframe is much shorter than the one that Glen Sather has gotten.
How do you not get that 8 years is a very long time, and that 13 years is even longer still? How do you continue to refuse to answer the one question that is at the basis of my entire argument: how long do we have to wait? How many years does this man get to throw **** against the wall?
I witnessed older Ranger fans during and after the 1994 Cup. Don't recall any of them suddenly relieving themselves of any of the animosity aimed at the people who contributed to a 54 year championship drought just because finally, the drought had ended.
What makes you more important than me?
Again, you have attributed claims to me that I never made. Never said that other team's fans don't deserve it. In fact, I made the opposite point. If fans of some teams deserve success, why not our fanbase? Great comparison, by the way, with the Panthers. A team that has changed owners multiple times in their short existence, has been mismanaged for years, and is generally considered one of the worst run franchises in any of the 4 major team sports. A horrible pro sports city in, where no one gives a crap about anything other than football. That's a fair comparison for the Rangers. My cousin lives near Miami. He went to all 4 Panthers playoff home games last year, sat in good seats, and spent less than $150. I can't go to one regular season game and sit in a good seat and spend that amount at MSG.
How am I a baby? Just because you lack appreciation for the difference between world class hockey and house league hockey, and are thus satisfied with anything they give you, doesn't mean that I have to be, or that I am any worse a fan than you. Just because you don't mind throwing money and time away and clapping like a trained seal when they throw fishbones at you doesn't give you the right to belittle me for having perfectly reasonable expectations out of a team. There is absolutely nothing wrong with demanding excellence from a sports team from time to time. This team hasn't given us excellence at any point during Glen Sather's career, and in general, in almost 20 years.
NickyFotiu
NYR 2024 Cup Champs!
- Sep 29, 2011
- 16,914
- 8,847
This team wins in spite of the coach not because of him. The talent level on this team is greater than the results. Torts has some good moments and some bad moments but overall he holds his players to a higher level of responsibility than the fans/media hold him.
Mike D Antoni got all the excuses in the book from some Knicks fans.
1. We were always told he needs "his kind" of players as an excuse
2. He would play Jared Jeffries a defensive fringe player huge minutes at times. Way more than any other team in the league would. Sound like Boyle?
3. When firing him was brought up people would always ask what better coach was available and point to his previous success with another team.
4. Could not get on the same page with a star player. (Does Melo=Gaborik?)
Well the Knicks finally fired Mike D Antoni and the team took off with an assistant coach (former head coach) after his replacement.
Mike D Antoni got all the excuses in the book from some Knicks fans.
1. We were always told he needs "his kind" of players as an excuse
2. He would play Jared Jeffries a defensive fringe player huge minutes at times. Way more than any other team in the league would. Sound like Boyle?
3. When firing him was brought up people would always ask what better coach was available and point to his previous success with another team.
4. Could not get on the same page with a star player. (Does Melo=Gaborik?)
Well the Knicks finally fired Mike D Antoni and the team took off with an assistant coach (former head coach) after his replacement.
Fleury4ever
Registered User
The one assistant coach thing is so weird to me... Why give away help? You can hire anybody, be unorthodox if you like, but just declining to make use of something that should help you compete makes me think you are immune to evidence and reason altering your professional approach.
Ryan McDonut
Registered User
he won a cup 8 years ago for a different team? silly me, he gets a free pass. he coached the rangers one good year, last year. and outside of that we've been mediocre. we were even mediocre during the playoff run last year.
esidebill
Registered User
We're not talking about a Phil Jackson type coach here. By no means do I consider him an elite coach. I agree with the comparison to Mike D'Antoni. He needs the right people, doesn't budge on changing up his system, etc. Knicks oust him, and now they're making a very viable Finals run. Sometimes a change in the coaching is what a team needs, regardless of if the coach is a good coach or not.
Fanned On It
Registered User
- Status
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
-
-
-
PICK ONLY ONE TEAM - 4 Nations Face-Off - ChampionWagers: 7Staked: $6,427.00Event closes
- Updated: