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

[SnowblindNYR]

Come on. Let's not act as though that was the intent when he handed out the bad contracts to Gomez and Gaborik.

I never said it was the intent. It was the result, who cares what the intent was? He's a net positive in my book.

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

I'm blown away.

How should we evaluate UFA signings then?

Look, of the big FA signings, Gaborik was far and away the best. But does that mean it was good? Two good seasons out of four.

 

[Ghost of jas]

To a 9 year deal? Haven't we learned the "one player away UFA fix" doesn't work?

IMO, for last year's team, it was the correct move. What I'd question about the signing was the NMC. Richards also had a positive effect on both Stepan and MDZ. And, because of the two amnesty buyouts, Sather will once again not be penalized for such a signing.

The MO was the same as the Drury and Gomez deals. And did the expiration of the CBA sneak up on him?

No, it wasn't. Drury and Gomez were counted on to be the leadership core when they were signed. Richards was added to supplement the core that was already being developed.

As for the expiration of CBA sneaking up on Sather, did it also sneak up on every other GM that made ridiculous long-term signings last summer? Most GMs operated under the assumption that, while there would be changes to the CBA, there were not likely going to be changes regarding existing contracts. That doesn't excuse Sather and company, but, in their minds the reward of bringing Richards outweighed the risks. Plus, you're living out the Tortorella factor. Tortorella pressed management hard to bring in Richards.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

I never said it was the intent. It was the result, who cares what the intent was? He's a net positive in my book.

You really want a man with a vision in the GM box. Im sure when Gomez signed in 2007, Sather envisioned flipping him for a defenseman that would shut down Ovechkin 6 years later.

I get what you're saying about this net positive stuff, but it took a long time to develop...and our franchise goaltender isnt getting any younger.

 

[Flavius]

It worked out better than Drury, Gomez and Redden if that's what you mean.

Go back to when Sather handed out the contract:

1) He had already failed on big-ticket items.

2) He gave a multi-million dollar, multi-year deal to a guy who played a total of 17 games the previous season and hadn't played over 80 games in the previous three.

Now, Gaborik did perform well for at times (a good seasons, a mediocre seaseon, a good season and bad season), but it's still a big ticket item that ultimately fell apart here and had to be dealt.

But let's assume that the Gaborik was an unqualified good move. What's the difference between the Gaborik deal and the Redden and Drury deals? Well, Gaboirik was 27 at the time. Meaning in theory Sather was paying for what he could do, not for what he's done. Lesson learned, right? Explain the Brad Richards deal then?

While I do see your point, I also see the benefits of the Gabby deal pre-signing. Gomez got a 7 year deal when he was what, 28? 29? Drury got a similar deal to Gabby but he was a few years older. We got a guy who, while injury prone throughout his career, was only 27 and signed him for 5 years. Just because previous big ticket items had failed in the past doesn't mean all big ticket items will fail in the future.

And as it stands right now the Gabby deal wasn't so terrible. If we kept him for the remainder of this year and next it could have been a different story, but in the end it worked out well for us. Does that mean that we shouldn't sign guys more than 3 years in case they end up not working out beyond that? Maybe. But I guess the opportunity cost outweighs that thinking when it comes to some of these deals.

 

[Thirty One]

Look, of the big FA signings, Gaborik was far and away the best. But does that mean it was good?

No. I made it very clear that I am not comparing the signing to Gomez, Redden or anyone else. You keep bringing them up, not me.

Two good seasons out of four.

Two elite goal scoring seasons and two seasons that were still easily second line scoring level.

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

IMO, for last year's team, it was the correct move. What I'd question about the signing was the NMC. Richards also had a positive effect on both Stepan and MDZ. And, because of the two amnesty buyouts, Sather will once again not be penalized for such a signing.

But isn't that part of the problem? Everything is done "for this season" there's a complete inability to see beyond the current season.

 

[Ghost of jas]

But isn't that part of the problem? Everything is done "for this season" there's a complete inability to see beyond the current season.

Does that include trading a fading 30-year-old one-dimensional scoring forward for a dynamic 25-year-old playmaking center whose potential is still not fulfilled, a 22-year-old defenseman with top 4 potential, as well as a 26-year 3rd line forward who adds grittiness to the bottom six? I'm not sure there is this "complete inability to see beyond the current season", as you call it.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Does that include trading a fading 30-year-old one-dimensional scoring forward for a dynamic 25-year-old playmaking center whose potential is still not fulfilled, a 22-year-old defenseman with top 4 potential, as well as a 26-year 3rd line forward who adds grittiness to the bottom six? I'm not sure there is this "complete inability to see beyond the current season", as you call it.

Sather went into this season thinking Gaborik and Nash were going to be a dynamic tandem.

He made a nice deal for depth and for the future, but it still doesnt change his propensity to fly by the seat of his pants when it comes to personnel decisions.

 

[Ghost of jas]

Sather went into this season thinking Gaborik and Nash were going to be a dynamic tandem.

And, for whatever reason, the coach wasn't able to make it work. Sather and company found a different solution.

He made a nice deal for depth and for the future, but it still doesnt change his propensity to fly by the seat of his pants when it comes to personnel decisions.

Except that the plan has been to build from the goal out, which is pretty much what they've followed all along.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

You really want a man with a vision in the GM box. Im sure when Gomez signed in 2007, Sather envisioned flipping him for a defenseman that would shut down Ovechkin 6 years later.

I get what you're saying about this net positive stuff, but it took a long time to develop...and our franchise goaltender isnt getting any younger.

It was still a great trade, same as the Gaborik one. You also want a man that's good at trading in the GM box. Also want a man that can fix his mistakes when he has to in the GM box. Not only did he fix his mistakes he improved the Rangers.

Food for thought:

If you're hiring an employee, do you want one that never makes mistakes or one that when he makes mistakes fixes them well?

 

[Thirty One]

It was still a great trade, same as the Gaborik one. You also want a man that's good at trading in the GM box. Also want a man that can fix his mistakes when he has to in the GM box. Not only did he fix his mistakes he improved the Rangers.

Food for thought:

If you're hiring an employee, do you want one that never makes mistakes or one that when he makes mistakes fixes them well?

Obvs never makes mistakes.

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

Food for thought:

If you're hiring an employee, do you want one that never makes mistakes or one that when he makes mistakes fixes them well?

I have hired employees and I want to hire people who learn from their mistakes.

 

[haveandare]

But isn't that part of the problem? Everything is done "for this season" there's a complete inability to see beyond the current season.

Gaborik deal was made for the future. Older scoring winger for three young pieces.

Gomez deal was definitely made for the future. Gomez had 58 points in his last season in NY, went to score 59 the next year with MTL. Sather traded him for a defensive prospect who is now an anchor and will remain one for years.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

I just think its bizarre that Sather gets credit and Tortorella gets scorn around here.

One man is far more responsible for the relative success of the past 2 seasons, and it ain't the one currently getting credit.

 

[Kershaw]

I just think its bizarre that Sather gets credit and Tortorella gets scorn around here.

One man is far more responsible for the relative success of the past 2 seasons, and it ain't the one currently getting credit.

It's mindbottling to me.

 

[Ghost of jas]

I just think its bizarre that Sather gets credit and Tortorella gets scorn around here.

One man is far more responsible for the relative success of the past 2 seasons, and it ain't the one currently getting credit.

Not in my book. Tortorella has been very important in nurturing the core since he's come here. 2010-11 and 2011-12 were both superb coaching performances, and I have not once been on the "fire Tortorella" bandwagon. However, IMO, this past regular season was not one of his better coaching performances. But, just like the team itself, he is in the process of redeeming himself so far in the playoffs.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Not in my book. Tortorella has been very important in nurturing the core since he's come here. 2010-11 and 2011-12 were both superb coaching performances, and I have not once been on the "fire Tortorella" bandwagon. However, IMO, this past regular season was not one of his better coaching performances. But, just like the team itself, he is in the process of redeeming himself so far in the playoffs.

48 games. 2 major roster overhauls. Scotty Bowman wouldnt have been able to straighten this group out in a matter of just a couple months.

 

[OverTheCap]

The Rangers have had major issues building the offense, they have had to retool far too many times since 2005: Jagr and his buddies, then the Drury and Gomez led offense in 2008-09, Gaborik and the Pack Line with the addition of Richards in 2011, and now we have an offense built around Nash.

That much turnover in the last 8 years indicates a level of short-sightedness, otherwise there would be little need to tear down the offense every other season. Part of the problem has to do with the Rangers inability to draft elite forward talent.

 

[Ghost of jas]

48 games. 2 major roster overhauls. Scotty Bowman wouldnt have been able to straighten this group out in a matter of just a couple months.

I'm not denying he had things to deal with, but, IMO, the results were what they were...a sixth place finish for a team that went to the ECF last year. Maybe I expect more from him as a coach, but, again,
it wasn't his best performance, especially in comparison to the two previous years.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

The Rangers have had major issues building the offense, they have had to retool far too many times since 2005: Jagr and his buddies, then the Drury and Gomez led offense in 2008-09, Gaborik and the Pack Line with the addition of Richards in 2011, and now we have an offense built around Nash.

That much turnover in the last 8 years indicates a level of short-sightedness, otherwise there would be little need to tear down the offense every other season. Part of the problem has to do with the Rangers inability to draft elite forward talent.

Well said. A poster earlier said the philosophy is "building from the net out." Maybe when all those guys have played for 10-15 years and are ready to hang it up, we'll be able to develop some offensive talent.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

I'm not denying he had things to deal with, but, IMO, the results were what they were...a sixth place finish for a team that went to the ECF last year. Maybe I expect more from him as a coach, but, again,
it wasn't his best performance, especially in comparison to the two previous years.

Was that really the same team that went to the conference finals though? I mean the entire bottom 6 was completely gutted. Twice. And look at the damage the bottom 6 did in this past series.

 

[Ghost of jas]

Was that really the same team that went to the conference finals though? I mean the entire bottom 6 was completely gutted. Twice. And look at the damage the bottom 6 did in this past series.

We appear to be talking about two different things. I'm not denying that the upheaval to the roster, combined with the lockout, made things more difficult for Tortorella. I do feel he struggled to get the most out of the roster, and his notable conflict with Gaborik had a negative effect on the team. If you're going to ask me if he did a good job coaching this year, I'm going to be honest and say not in comparison to the two previous years.

 

[Kreider Typical]

it's pretty nice when our coach actually out-coaches somebody... i still wouldn't mind him being gone, but he coached a hell of a game 7. did what we've all been waiting for all this time and adjusted the system

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

it's pretty nice when our coach actually out-coaches somebody... i still wouldn't mind him being gone, but he coached a hell of a game 7. did what we've all been waiting for all this time and adjusted the system

...in your own mind's eye.

What do you think is more plausible, the coach adjusting an entire system of play before a game 7, or the team just playing better?

The answer is the latter - plus a little puck luck.