To be fair i dont exactly give him all the credit for getting them to the ECF. I mean honestlly the rangers almost lost to the 8th seeded Senators and if it wasnt for Hank and the emergence of CK we would have probably lost in teh first round
News Article: Arron Asham on Torts and his future
- Thread starter RangerBoy
- 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
Precisely. It was the same stuff with Renney. His system was holding the team back.
Sooner or later these players are going to have to look in the mirror and realize they are not as inheritantly offensively talented as the top teams in the league. The equalizer is strong, relentless, tough play. The '11-12 team bought into it and had the Rangers best season since the cup. Why did this year's version think it was "too tough"
If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle. I don't give Tortorella all the credit either -- I give more credit to a team who had the stones to lay it on the line every night.
eco's bones
Registered User
There were several misjudgments. One that the team had enough depth to bring Nash in and not replace Anisimov, Dubinsky, Fedotenko and Prust with players of similar ability and not suffer for it. These guys were all replaced by guys too old to cut it anymore--Pyatt, Halpern, Asham, Powe. Too much onus then on a too small group of players to pick up the slack. Then Richards play falling off a cliff--followed by injuries particularly to Staal.
It seems to be the more Tortorella blows off steam in post game press conferences during any given year the ****tier the season his team is having. It can be funny at times but it's usually a distraction and counterproductive. Specialty teams weren't that good again--we're used to the pwp sucking but the pk took too many hits in the last off season and it showed in the end--particularly against Boston in the playoffs.
The players have to take some responsibility too. Torts boy Richards was awful--almost the entire year and worse than useless in the playoffs. How can a player be worse than useless?--by hurting his team and helping the other team. That's where he was and it took Tortorella an awful long time to figure it out and his own management team to finally step in and bench his golden boy--so it's pretty near inexplicable to me why the same management team decided to give Mr. Richards another chance--just on his play alone he deserved to be kicked out onto the street--let alone the albatross of a contract he's carrying. So how Torts ran the team is one thing--and I know the majority here wanted done with him but GMGS also should bear some of the brunt for last year's step backward.
It seems to be the more Tortorella blows off steam in post game press conferences during any given year the ****tier the season his team is having. It can be funny at times but it's usually a distraction and counterproductive. Specialty teams weren't that good again--we're used to the pwp sucking but the pk took too many hits in the last off season and it showed in the end--particularly against Boston in the playoffs.
The players have to take some responsibility too. Torts boy Richards was awful--almost the entire year and worse than useless in the playoffs. How can a player be worse than useless?--by hurting his team and helping the other team. That's where he was and it took Tortorella an awful long time to figure it out and his own management team to finally step in and bench his golden boy--so it's pretty near inexplicable to me why the same management team decided to give Mr. Richards another chance--just on his play alone he deserved to be kicked out onto the street--let alone the albatross of a contract he's carrying. So how Torts ran the team is one thing--and I know the majority here wanted done with him but GMGS also should bear some of the brunt for last year's step backward.
Blue Seat Spartan
Permanent Vacation
If there's at least one thing to give Tortorella credit for, it was establishing accountability on the ice during the heart of his tenure in New York. That being said, Tortorella's coaching style had very likely run its course by the time this season ended. His stubbornness on imposing his system on the Rangers enabled the 2012 team to reach within two wins of the Cup final, but also exposed the susceptibilities of playing 82 regular season + 2 consecutive seven game playoff series worth of attrition-style hockey to the extent that it was exploited by the opponents. The only logical conclusion being that this house of cards fell apart in the latter part of the 2013 season and the semifinals when the Rangers, while not being terribly outclassed, were definitely outplayed and surely outcoached by Claude Julien's Bruins.
Tortorella is a coaching relic of the 90s, a Keenanesque taskmaster sans the flair for the theatrics. His insistence on having only a single assistant coach in Mike Sullivan flies in the face of the contemporary wisdom of delegating coaching duties to at least two assistants. And his mantra of "Stay the Course" eventually became code for: "This is our system! We won't change it! Come and exploit it!" The vaunted "Safe is Death" philosophy which we saw in Tampa Bay and eagerly awaited on Broadway didn't materialize, and was replaced with "Chip, chase, grind, and JAM with a generous helping of Five-Goalie System" ad nauseam that, while it maximized the talent on the Rangers roster to a 2011-12 Atlantic Division championship, became its Achilles' Heel.
Arron Asham surprisingly was level-headed and objective in his interview & commentary with the Toronto Sun. Spot on assessment of Tortorella, who while he would've wanted to play for him for a longer time frame, eventually grated on even his most ardent supporters on the team (e.g. Callahan, Richards, etc).
Final verdict on Torts and the Rangers? Mentally, physically tough (but not enough mental agility to adapt to AND dictate the pace of the game).
The fact all the top teams in the league stuck with the same lines for long periods of time when healthy and Torts wouldn't do this says all you need to know about him. He was clueless on how to create offense.
Torts must've caught amnesia or something. Couldn't have had anything to do with the fact that Tampa team was simply a better offensive team, right? Nahhh.
aufheben
#Norris4Fox
The top teams in the league have players exactly where they should be, because they have depth throughout the lineup. We tried a number of players in the Top 6. This team is just not that good offensively.
Top teams start with a top roster.
BlueshirtBlitz
Foolish Samurai
"The five goalie system" got us to the ECF.
Anybody who uses that term really should think about it before they just spit it out. What a stupid HF meme.
Anybody who uses that term really should think about it before they just spit it out. What a stupid HF meme.
Hunter Gathers
The Crown
Then no one can take you seriously. Your posting doesn't afford you that.
What a ludicrous thing to suggest on your part. Who cares if his teams were boring? They nearly made the SCF. What, would you be here posting the same crap if we won the Cup? Would it have been invalid because it would have been boring?
If the end result is winning, who cares how we got there? This is the same bunch of crap some people gave the Devils. "Wah, you're boring." Guess what, bud? Boring won them three freaking Cups.
Hunter Gathers
The Crown
Yet if we had a solid starter instead of Lundqvist but had more offensive depth, we likely would have had just as good of a chance to make the Stanley Cup Finals as we did with Lundqvist.
Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,357
Blue Seat Spartan
Permanent Vacation
I'm aware of the fact that the Rangers under Torts were ridiculed by the NHL pundits for their style of play, especially in the 2012 playoffs. If you think about it, the "Six Goalie" system (Five when Gaborik was MIA in the defensive zone
) was a palette swap of the "Five in the Picture" defensive scheme embraced by Tom Renney and juiced up by his coaching successor.The misconceptions arose from the Rangers being a "Defense-first team". How the **** did the Rangers get lumped in with the likes of the '95 New Jersey Devils or the '99 Dallas Stars?!? Fact of the matter is, Torts' system was essentially imported from Tampa Bay, MINUS the offensive flash
. Basically, two-men forechecking hard & deep, defensemen pinching in the offensive zone, backcheck like the wrath of God is coming upon you. Sound familiar from 1994? Similar to Mike Keenan's pressure the puck in all three zones!
The BIGGEST deviation between TB Torts and NYR Torts is what their teams did once they retrieved the puck off the forecheck. THIS is where "Safe is Death" took over: Lecavalier, St. Louis, Richards, and Dan Boyle were the engine of the Lightning's offensive strike. Conversely, the Rangers c. 2011-2012 only had Gaborik and a probably declining Brad Richards (though he awoke during the playoffs) driving the offense, only helped by McDonagh and MDZ joining the rush and producing from the point.
I saw a dozen of the Rangers' games in 2010-11 when they were still a work in progress from the 8th Ave. end Blue Seats. It was clear that their game plan was to dump the puck in, send two forecheckers, and then cycle the puck to generate offense. That system was at its peak efficiency the next season when Torts had his guys (Dubinsky, Anisimov, Fedotenko, Prust) to storm the trenches and mash up the opponents' defense. However, the lack of top end talent caused the Rangers to needlessly go to seven games in consecutive series and then succumb to the Devils in six. When the annual turnover of roster occurred in the offseason (Dubinsky & Anisimov traded for Nash, Prust & Fedotenko left via UFA) Torts couldn't effectively run his system anymore, leading to him pounding square pegs into round holes. End result being that the Rangers became a predictable team to prepare for and adjust accordingly, to which Julien and the Bruins gladly obliged by outplaying the Rangers at their game.
offdacrossbar
misfit fanboy
Then no one can take you seriously. Your posting doesn't afford you that.
What a ludicrous thing to suggest on your part. Who cares if his teams were boring? They nearly made the SCF. What, would you be here posting the same crap if we won the Cup? Would it have been invalid because it would have been boring?
If the end result is winning, who cares how we got there? This is the same bunch of crap some people gave the Devils. "Wah, you're boring." Guess what, bud? Boring won them three freaking Cups.
like usual, you cherry pick parts of my post and make it like that is my main premise. which it was not. yes, his brand of hockey was boring. is that even in question ?
and yes jon, i cannot overlook torts in totality. he was the sum of all his parts. part clown. part jerk. part snarky smartass. part bad in game coach. part micro manager. part stubborn stuck in the 90's oldschooler and lastly, part of, if not most of, the problem with this team looking unprepared, outclassed and clueless on many nights.
torts was like the bobby knight of the nhl sans the winning championships. i dont take knight seriously either. another pompous, arrogant, no boundaries goofball.
and i hated the devils style of play. it was impossible to watch. trap trap trap. score 1 maybe 2 goals and trap your opponent to death.
unwatchable. hockey.
big difference though jon.... lemaires teams wons cups.... johnny boys nyr teams... not so much.
I'm aware of the fact that the Rangers under Torts were ridiculed by the NHL pundits for their style of play, especially in the 2012 playoffs. If you think about it, the "Six Goalie" system (Five when Gaborik was MIA in the defensive zone
The misconceptions arose from the Rangers being a "Defense-first team". How the **** did the Rangers get lumped in with the likes of the '95 New Jersey Devils or the '99 Dallas Stars?!? Fact of the matter is, Torts' system was essentially imported from Tampa Bay, MINUS the offensive flash
. Basically, two-men forechecking hard & deep, defensemen pinching in the offensive zone, backcheck like the wrath of God is coming upon you. Sound familiar from 1994? Similar to Mike Keenan's pressure the puck in all three zones!
The BIGGEST deviation between TB Torts and NYR Torts is what their teams did once they retrieved the puck off the forecheck. THIS is where "Safe is Death" took over: Lecavalier, St. Louis, Richards, and Dan Boyle were the engine of the Lightning's offensive strike. Conversely, the Rangers c. 2011-2012 only had Gaborik and a probably declining Brad Richards (though he awoke during the playoffs) driving the offense, only helped by McDonagh and MDZ joining the rush and producing from the point.
I saw a dozen of the Rangers' games in 2010-11 when they were still a work in progress from the 8th Ave. end Blue Seats. It was clear that their game plan was to dump the puck in, send two forecheckers, and then cycle the puck to generate offense. That system was at its peak efficiency the next season when Torts had his guys (Dubinsky, Anisimov, Fedotenko, Prust) to storm the trenches and mash up the opponents' defense. However, the lack of top end talent caused the Rangers to needlessly go to seven games in consecutive series and then succumb to the Devils in six. When the annual turnover of roster occurred in the offseason (Dubinsky & Anisimov traded for Nash, Prust & Fedotenko left via UFA) Torts couldn't effectively run his system anymore, leading to him pounding square pegs into round holes. End result being that the Rangers became a predictable team to prepare for and adjust accordingly, to which Julien and the Bruins gladly obliged by outplaying the Rangers at their game.
I think its unfair to expect a coach to totally deviate from a plan (that previously worked) in a 48 game schedule, after massive roster turnover.
On that note, I think its sad that the direction of this team can be dictated by a few weasels that whine to the GM about being yelled at by their coach.
Sure, I hope AV tweaks the system a bit, but the bottom line is I want every Ranger team to play with the tenacity and heart that the 2011-2012 team played with. Last year's team didnt have the balls to do that. If they think they're going to win games with the same indifferent attitude next season because of a few system tweaks, its going to be a long season. They're not good enough for that, and they don't deserve the knee-jerk outcome they got by *****ing to Sather.
In my opinion Torts isnt even worth talking about anymore. Its obvious he needed to go and now im excited to see the offense finally have more freedom this year and give hank some support.
Yes, we know. You apparently don't think the players are worth talking about much either being you gave Kreider every pass in the world during his disgusting season. I'll bet you anything that he is one of the weasels Im talking about. Poor guy - so scared to make a mistake out there - but not scared to throw a coach under the bus. Vigneault better watch his step or he'll be the next casualty in this kangaroo court.
Yes, it is in question. Believe it or not, but "boredom" and "fun" are subjective traits. Personally, I'll take a 2-1 hockey game that is executed well over a sloppy 6-5 game with all sorts of defensive errors and stupid decisions. If you feel differently then that's your prerogative. But stop pretending that how boring a specific style of play is can be objectively quantified.
This isn't a Miss Congeniality contest. You're not required to hang out with him on weekends. Who gives a **** whether he is "snarky" or a "jerk" if he is getting results? Obviously last season he didn't. But somehow, despite being a mean poopyface and being "stuck in the 90s" his team finished on top of the conference and two games out of the Stanley Cup Finals the season before. He wasn't mister softy then, either. So clearly the problems were not inherent in those things.
Again, all of this is irrelevant to the actual job title. Things like this would matter if he was a PR person.
Again, your opinion and you're allowed it. But don't blame the Devils for working with what they had. Blame the NHL for not making changes sooner. It's not John Tortorella's job to make the game more "exciting." Yell at Bettman to instill changes if that's what you want.
And surely the teams they were handed had nothing to do with this, right? When Jacques Lemaire took over as NJD head coach he had Scott Niedermayer and Scott Stevens as his top two defensemen. When John Tortorella took over he had Marek Malik and Michal Rozsival. Somehow I don't think Jacques Lemaire has a Stanley Cup ring two seasons into his tenure if he's taking over the 2008 Rangers.
LoL Dude you really need to calm down. I dont know where all this crap came from. I simply said Torts is gone its time to move on
Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,357
eco's bones
Registered User
Quite rightly the Rangers were built around their goalie and their defensemen because in all honesty those were the strongest areas of the team. The Rangers weren't ever likely to beat the Penguins at their own run and gun game. We don't have the talent to do that. Teams win by playing to their strengths. I had no problem with our 11-12 season beyond the fact that we fell short--there were some obvious reasons for that--two very long and grueling series against teams that played a physical grinding game--not enough depth on our defense and then the Rangers ran into another physical team that took control of the boards and corners.
The Rangers have tried to narrow the forward talent gap the last few years with mixed results. Gaborik--good year, bad year, good year, bad year-trade. Richards--okay year, horrible year. Nash--good year. Richards and Gaborik from the free agent market did not cost us depth. Nash via trade did. The Rangers did not address the lack of depth created by the Nash trade until almost the end of the year trading Gaborik a legit 1st line forward for it. At the same time many of the same issues remain--no one has stepped up to claim pwp qb or pwp point shot--so I'm not expecting a better pwp. The Rangers offense is a mixed bag and because it's a mixed bag we need to have as many NHL quality forwards as possible so we can roll 4 lines, so we can kill penalties, so we can protect our best players and we're most likely again in 2013-14 to be strongest in goal and in defending our goal. I don't see any new additions that suggest otherwise and if Richards continues his decline like I suspect he will that's only going to reinforce the need to hang the Broadway hat on Henrik and ride things out like the last few seasons.
The Rangers have tried to narrow the forward talent gap the last few years with mixed results. Gaborik--good year, bad year, good year, bad year-trade. Richards--okay year, horrible year. Nash--good year. Richards and Gaborik from the free agent market did not cost us depth. Nash via trade did. The Rangers did not address the lack of depth created by the Nash trade until almost the end of the year trading Gaborik a legit 1st line forward for it. At the same time many of the same issues remain--no one has stepped up to claim pwp qb or pwp point shot--so I'm not expecting a better pwp. The Rangers offense is a mixed bag and because it's a mixed bag we need to have as many NHL quality forwards as possible so we can roll 4 lines, so we can kill penalties, so we can protect our best players and we're most likely again in 2013-14 to be strongest in goal and in defending our goal. I don't see any new additions that suggest otherwise and if Richards continues his decline like I suspect he will that's only going to reinforce the need to hang the Broadway hat on Henrik and ride things out like the last few seasons.
Yes, this. Saved me typing time. Right guy, right time in the beginning but team and the lack of flexability outgrew him. His idiosyncracies didnt help. Thanks for your service, next please. Torts is not a 6 year tenure guy. He's a 2-3 year hitman for a club that needs a jolt. In that context he did just fine.
Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,357
Of course it's allowed. You're also allowed to say Torts isn't even worth talking about, but it's advisable to own up to it.
Eh. I'm not sure I believe Kreider had THAT much say in something like that.
It did seem pretty clear that Torts and management had differing views on Kreider's role this season tho
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
-
-
USA vs Canada- Centre Bell, MontréalWagers: 4Staked: $2,414.00Event closes - 2 days from now
- Updated:
-