Toggle sidebar

All Encompassing Tortorella..ella..ella..eh..eh...and Glen Cigar Thread Part IV

  • Thread starter Thread starter Vidic15*
  • Start date 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
Not open for further replies.
Just curious, but has it ever happen that a NHL coach has quit? I cannot think of any, they seem to be hired until fired.
If the aswer is yes, any chance Torts has enough self respect to realize he is not the right man for the job with the NYR?
 
Everyone screams about offense? Oates switched Kovalchuk to the right side after MacLean tried to make that switch but Kovalchuk wouldn't go for it. Now he switched Ovechkin to the right side.
 
Hellion said:
Just curious, but has it ever happen that a NHL coach has quit? I cannot think of any, they seem to be hired until fired.
If the aswer is yes, any chance Torts has enough self respect to realize he is not the right man for the job with the NYR?
Click to expand...

Dale Hunter quit to go back to the London Knights.
 
Hellion said:
Thought the Caps always intended him as a temp?
So i guess there is hope.. :P
Click to expand...

I don't think they technically fired him.

I think the Hunter family owns the Knights, which are a very successful OHL team, and from all accounts, he enjoys coaching them and living on his farm.
 
Replace Torts with an offensive minded coach

Keep Sullivan but tell him he'll be stoned if he goes anywhere near a PP and the whiteboard

Bring in anything with a brain to work on the PP now that Torts isn't there to limit the # of coaches

Bonus: Ship Glen Sather to the International Space Station where he can spend a lot of money on and trade things completely unrelated to this team, such as moon rocks
 
Grind Jam Grind said:
I don't think they technically fired him.

I think the Hunter family owns the Knights, which are a very successful OHL team, and from all accounts, he enjoys coaching them and living on his farm.
Click to expand...

Yeah i looked it up, and its seems the story was that he missed his family and wanted to go back to his farm etc.

Since NYR wont fire Torts i was just thinking that perhaps if this season is heading the way it seems, Torts terminates himself from the coaching job. Seems more likely to happen that way, then him getting fired
 
Hellion said:
Yeah i looked it up, and its seems the story was that he missed his family and wanted to go back to his farm etc.

Since NYR wont fire Torts i was just thinking that perhaps if this season is heading the way it seems, Torts terminates himself from the coaching job. Seems more likely to happen that way, then him getting fired
Click to expand...

I'd love that, but it probably won't happen.

A little OT, but does anyone else find it funny how he seems to hate the media when he worked for TSN between his coaching tenures?
 
Jonathan. said:
I could not care less if Messier is the GM if he can actually find talent. Creativity is overrated. Winning is not.
Click to expand...

It's a not a question of creativity. It's a question of not making every move in a vacuum.

"Let's trade for Nash. We had trouble scoring in the playoffs now with Nash and Gaborik we have two legit goal scorers"

"Oh no now we don't have any grit and we lack depth."

"OK, so we'll trade Gaborik and gut our draft. Yay! No we have some grit (when Dorsett or Clowe are on the ice) and we have some depth."

"Oh wait, now we're having trouble scoring in the playoffs."
 
Joe Micheletti is on Francesa's show. Joe brings up Kreider. He would play Kreider. He can skate and shoot the puck. Torts doesn't trust Kreider.
 
One comment by Tortorella that troubles me is the use of the word "stagnant" to describe the Rangers' power play in the playoffs. No **** it's stagnant! It's not like it's a new problem that just surfaced against Washington. The players have been slow and predictable on the power play for years under his coaching staff. When is this going to get fixed? Why is it an annual weakness?

And if it's not the coaching staff but rather personnel, what is preventing Sather from acquiring the correct player(s)?
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway said:
It's a not a question of creativity. It's a question of not making every move in a vacuum.

"Let's trade for Nash. We had trouble scoring in the playoffs now with Nash and Gaborik we have two legit goal scorers"

"Oh no now we don't have any grit and we lack depth."

"OK, so we'll trade Gaborik and gut our draft. Yay! No we have some grit (when Dorsett or Clowe are on the ice) and we have some depth."

"Oh wait, now we're having trouble scoring in the playoffs."
Click to expand...

Well, the Gaborik trade was clearly a good decision, with the recent news of Gaborik re-injuring his groin — he is pretty much done. We got three solid, young NHL players in return. There really is no room to complain about that move, it was handled excellently by Sather, IMO.

The Clowe trade is the move I can see people having problems with, and I can see why. I was behind the trade 100% and I still am. I like Clowe a lot and I like what he's brought to this lineup. I think, of he plays, he's going to have a noticeable impact on the game tonight. That said, yeah, it hurts giving up two/three top-90 picks for a player who might not be here long term, although I think the Rangers are going to try and keep Clowe (at a reasonable price, hopefully).

The Nash trade...well, the jury is still out on that one. Nash had a very productive season, and with the recent acquisitions, Dubinsky/Anisimov aren't missed. The contract is hard to swallow, but, again, I think it's a good move. It hurts giving up the first rounder, but Nash is a great goal scorer who is big and, IMO, he has been better than Gaborik ever has in the playoffs, even if he hasn't produced any points — no one has produced in the playoffs, thus far.

I don't know if the Nash/Gaborik trades were done for the reasons you say — Sather has always been interested in Nash, and the time to trade Gaborik was at the deadline.

Again, though, that doesn't mean I want Sather to stay. Just that I don't think those two moves in particular were bad, or even misguided moves.
 
Bleed Ranger Blue said:
My point with the Trottier comment is that so many people are concerned about the on-ice offensive output. Certainly worth a conversation. But theres a lot more that goes into being an NHL coach. A lot more.

So "Oh, Joey Mullen was a good offensive player, lets try him" isnt going to cut it.
Click to expand...

No, that's not it.

Mullen had a one year gig as an AHL HC and won 28 of 52 games.

He's also run the Flyers PP since 2007

07-08 - 2nd in the league at 21%
08-09 - 6th in the league at 22%
09-10 - 3rd in the league at 21%
10-11 - 19th in the league at 16%
11-12 - 6th in the league at 19%
12-13 - 3rd in the league at 21%

Again, as I stated, should everything else stay the same, by improving the Rangers PP we would be a better team. The benefit of knowing how to generate an offensive attack (something the current idiot doesn't know how to do) can only improve the teams fortunes.

So, yes, there are other elements of being a Head Coach. Someone should tell that to our current guy who seems hell bent on ignoring the one aspect absolutely needed to win games. Goals.

I have stated all along that we need balance. We are not getting that with our current guy.

I have not once advocated going in a direction that would abandon playing solid defensive hockey. All I am looking to get is someone in here that can improve our offence. I do not believe that the system employed by Torts is conducive to generating offensive chances consistently.
 
Zenith said:
Well, the Gaborik trade was clearly a good decision, with the recent news of Gaborik re-injuring his groin — he is pretty much done. We got three solid, young NHL players in return. There really is no room to complain about that move, it was handled excellently by Sather, IMO.

The Clowe trade is the move I can see people having problems with, and I can see why. I was behind the trade 100% and I still am. I like Clowe a lot and I like what he's brought to this lineup. I think, of he plays, he's going to have a noticeable impact on the game tonight. That said, yeah, it hurts giving up two/three top-90 picks for a player who might not be here long term, although I think the Rangers are going to try and keep Clowe (at a reasonable price, hopefully).

The Nash trade...well, the jury is still out on that one. Nash had a very productive season, and with the recent acquisitions, Dubinsky/Anisimov aren't missed. The contract is hard to swallow, but, again, I think it's a good move. It hurts giving up the first rounder, but Nash is a great goal scorer who is big and, IMO, he has been better than Gaborik ever has in the playoffs, even if he hasn't produced any points — no one has produced in the playoffs, thus far.

I don't know if the Nash/Gaborik trades were done for the reasons you say — Sather has always been interested in Nash, and the time to trade Gaborik was at the deadline.

Again, though, that doesn't mean I want Sather to stay. Just that I don't think those two moves in particular were bad, or even misguided moves.
Click to expand...


You're almost falling in the same trap that Sather does. You're looking at these moves individually and in a vacuum.
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway said:
You're almost falling in the same trap that Sather does. You're looking at these moves individually and in a vacuum.
Click to expand...

This.

It's pretty tough to explain. Individually, moves look okay on paper. But the team continues to toil in perpetual mediocrity.

Would've preferred neither of those trades since previous players helped lead team to ECF and 50 wins. Then everything was blown up.
 
Kershaw said:
This.

It's pretty tough to explain. Individually, moves look okay on paper. But the team continues to toil in perpetual mediocrity.

Would've preferred neither of those trades since previous players helped lead team to ECF and 50 wins. Then everything was blown up.
Click to expand...

The talent is here. The coach needs to be replaced, PERIOD.

If we lose to Washington and we don't fire the coach, then expect more of the same, next year.
 
KreiMeARiver said:
The talent is here. The coach needs to be replaced, PERIOD.

If we lose to Washington and we don't fire the coach, then expect more of the same, next year.
Click to expand...

When broken down Brad Richards is your teams 2nd line C, Dan Girardi is your #1 Dman in TOI/PG, Ryan Callahan is #1 in TOI/PG for forwards Hagelin, Zuccarello are top 6 forwards, using excuse for absence of washed up Ryane Clowe for lack of scoring, Pyatt was best bottom 6er for parts of the year, Dorsett 3rd line winger on Rangers, 4th on Columbus, etc. This team is largely mediocre and people are being deluded as if they are talented. They are one of the worst skilled teams in the league.
 
Kershaw said:
When broken down Brad Richards is your teams 2nd line C, Dan Girardi is your #1 Dman in TOI/PG, Ryan Callahan is #1 in TOI/PG for forwards Hagelin, Zuccarello are top 6 forwards, using excuse for absence of washed up Ryane Clowe for lack of scoring, Pyatt was best bottom 6er for parts of the year, Dorsett 3rd line winger on Rangers, 4th on Columbus, etc. This team is largely mediocre and people are being deluded as if they are talented. They are one of the worst skilled teams in the league.
Click to expand...

Dorsett was not a 4th liner in CLB.
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway said:
It's a not a question of creativity. It's a question of not making every move in a vacuum.

"Let's trade for Nash. We had trouble scoring in the playoffs now with Nash and Gaborik we have two legit goal scorers"

"Oh no now we don't have any grit and we lack depth."

"OK, so we'll trade Gaborik and gut our draft. Yay! No we have some grit (when Dorsett or Clowe are on the ice) and we have some depth."

"Oh wait, now we're having trouble scoring in the playoffs."
Click to expand...

Trading for Nash and than trading Gaborik to CBJ is the most obvious example of the knuckleheadedness of this whole organization. Individually the moves might make sense but if you look in tandem you can see that there was no long term planning involved whatsoever.
 
Jonathan. said:
Boucher? Yuck. No.

Eakins is a HUGE gamble. Really tough to go with an AHL coach for this team.

Who is Horacek?
Click to expand...

WHY?

Because it's New York? Complete and utter crap.

What lazy is staying with the guy that has shown ZERO improvement in structuring a team and plan that can win on a consistent basis.

What you seem to be advocating is not making a move cause there's not one guy jumping out as the most obvious choice.

That's lazy.

What the Rangers need to start doing is stop thinking that they are above other franchises in the sense that teh can't do certain things because they are in a larger market.

We can't bring in a no name guy. We're NY we need a name. Arrogant line of thought.

We can't bring in a 2nd straight no name GM, we need the biggest name out there at the time. He's been an utter failure since coming here.

The line of thinking that the Rangers need a reputation leading the way as opposed to a qualified guy is going to prevent this team from improving.

Sather was a reputation hire. And while Torts hasn't done a bad job so to speak, the team has shown no improvement in the areas needed to improve to getr this team to the next level and it's not the players. The system is flawed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom