Confirmed with Link: David Quinn Dismissed

[mas0764]

Question If you are Rod do you take 1.8 in Carolina or 4.5 in the apple.

If I wasn’t a Rangers fan the correct answer would be the 1.8 in Raleigh. But I am a Rangers fan so there’s that.

 

[chosen]

I have them in the playoffs next season, winning a round and maybe being competitive in round two the season after that, and then being a legit contender. I'll be surprised if a team this young doesn't get its teeth kicked in in round one the first time out. Shesty is great, but I don't think he has the Lundqvistian ability to drag a team through multiple playoff rounds on his own. I think as fans, we've gotten so used to him doing that, that we sometimes forget how tough it is to win a single round of playoff hockey.

Also, only some Quinn detractors had the playoffs as the line of demarcation. My whole issue was that Quinn seemed to be prioritizing team success over development and ended up with neither. Even then, while I think this is best for the team moving forward, you won't ever see me celebrating someone losing their job. I think Quinn can be a good NHL coach--I just think now was way too soon for him to be one. He needs to figure out how to stand up to his veteran players if he wants to actually be in charge.

I'm curious as to which veterans Quinn didn't stand up to.

 

[Blueshirt Believer]

I'm curious as to which veterans Quinn didn't stand up to.

Strome for sure.

 

[chosen]

Where in my comment do you see that?

Is it fair to say this is a negative take by you on Quinn?

"He just sucks at managing people at this level because he never worked with NHL veterans and had a hard time going up against NHL coaches".

Is it fair to say that this statement by you is in direct contrast?

"I'll probably keep posting the same dope ass takes I've always posted because I never said Quinn was holding this team back from being good".

 

[chosen]

Yea because that was really what was happening...it couldnt be that the fan base was fed up with the team coming out flat and unresponsive all the time.... that section of the fan base was unreasonable because the team was simply losing after the 1st period...

Next coach could fail, but much rather take my chances with a new voice to light a fire under their asses and have them ready to play from puck drop

That's all well and good.

My point remains that whomever the next coach is, the slightest perceived screwup and there will be a group moaning that we hired an idiot.

 

[smoneil]

I'm curious as to which veterans Quinn didn't stand up to.

I wrote about it in the "Last game of the season GDT." We were talking about the disconnect where Quinn kept preaching N/S and the top vets kept playing East/West. It reminded me of a quote I'd seen from Strome in a Carp article a few weeks back. Strome basically said that he knows the coach wants them to be more direct and shoot more, but that he needs to trust the "top players" (and he definitely used a "we" in the following clause, so he was talking about himself as well) to make the right play and not "micromanage" them. It was the boldest public defiance of a coach that I'd seen in quite a while. You can see the quote itself in that thread (I included the link to the Carp article and the quote itself--I think it's on the last page of the thread). But it helped to explain a whole lot. He told them to do one thing. They did the opposite and whined to the media about being "micromanaged." And Quinn's response was effectively "okay. Have more minutes guys." That (the constant regression to fancypants hockey that never worked against the Isles) was one of the more notable issues that was present through the entire season. In fact, it seemed to become MORE of an issue the longer the season went on.

There have also been articles mentioning Quinn's allowing PP1 to stay on as long as they liked, letting Panarin pick his own linemates, etc. That kind of explains the shitty attitude that Kreider had when his minutes were cut and he was demoted to the 3rd line late in the season. It was the first time all season that any of the big 5 (Kreids, Zib, Bread, Strome, and to a lesser extent Buch) saw repercussions for extended poor play.

 

[Machinehead]

Is it fair to say this is a negative take by you on Quinn?

"He just sucks at managing people at this level because he never worked with NHL veterans and had a hard time going up against NHL coaches".

Is it fair to say that this statement by you is in direct contrast?

"I'll probably keep posting the same dope ass takes I've always posted because I never said Quinn was holding this team back from being good".

You can criticize the coach and also think it's not solely because of the coach that the team didn't make the playoffs. Both of those things can be true.

 

[HFsNumber1Heel]

Quinn wasn't a good coach and he's definitely number 4/4 of the post-2005 lockout coaches, but he's not the worst coach or worst Rangers coach ever.

I lived through Ron Low and Bryan Trottier. I heard stories about Jean-Guy Talbot. And then there was anything and everything that went on when Esposito was GM here.

If Quinn is the worst coach you all ever know, consider yourselves lucky.

 

[NoQuitInNewMexico]

I keep forgetting about those Strome quotes lol. The NHL is a league where you chill with your bros

 

[Kords]

Brind'Amour isn't swayed by money, he made that as a player. He's a different breed, that's part of why the players would run through a wall for him. Dude literally agreed to take less money to ensure his staff stays employed.

If we are fantasizing about getting him, Dolan needs to open his wallet and offer his staff 3x what Carolina is. At that point Rod would be almost selfish not to take the job.

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

And I was literally talking about how I am not talking about the knicks

why would you ignore how he handles his other team?

 

[chosen]

I wrote about it in the "Last game of the season GDT." We were talking about the disconnect where Quinn kept preaching N/S and the top vets kept playing East/West. It reminded me of a quote I'd seen from Strome in a Carp article a few weeks back. Strome basically said that he knows the coach wants them to be more direct and shoot more, but that he needs to trust the "top players" (and he definitely used a "we" in the following clause, so he was talking about himself as well) to make the right play and not "micromanage" them. It was the boldest public defiance of a coach that I'd seen in quite a while. You can see the quote itself in that thread (I included the link to the Carp article and the quote itself--I think it's on the last page of the thread). But it helped to explain a whole lot. He told them to do one thing. They did the opposite and whined to the media about being "micromanaged." And Quinn's response was effectively "okay. Have more minutes guys." That (the constant regression to fancypants hockey that never worked against the Isles) was one of the more notable issues that was present through the entire season. In fact, it seemed to become MORE of an issue the longer the season went on.

There have also been articles mentioning Quinn's allowing PP1 to stay on as long as they liked, letting Panarin pick his own linemates, etc. That kind of explains the shitty attitude that Kreider had when his minutes were cut and he was demoted to the 3rd line late in the season. It was the first time all season that any of the big 5 (Kreids, Zib, Bread, Strome, and to a lesser extent Buch) saw repercussions for extended poor play.

Are you saying it's the fault of the coach or the players who didn't listen?

Since Strome is the speaker and there's a WE attached to it, we can assume that Panarin has to be part of the WE.

If the new coach wants N/S and Panarin doesn't do it, does he get traded? Panarin will never be that kind of player, no matter who coaches.

So, is the solution to make the roster play N/S and allow Panarin's line to freelance or should the coach bench Panarin if he disobeys or is the solution for everyone to play E/W, which wouldn't make much sense, considering where we think the team direction is headed?

 

[Kaapo Cabana]

He wasn’t the greatest coach, but he wasn’t the worst. I hated his constant line juggling, and playing favorites with plugs like Howden, but lots of coaches do that shit. Not an excuse, but it’s not like any warm body would have done a better job.

I don’t regret his tenure, nor do think he stuck around too long.

he was fired at the exact right time. He was a breath of fresh air after AV, but now we need someone to help us take the next step.

 

[rangers1314]

Chris Johnston also reporting that Gallant is at the top of the list, but NYR want to see if others shake loose. So don’t expect a hire soon.

I assume that means they are waiting to see if Burke/Hex fire Sullivan, which I seriously doubt.

 

[chosen]

You can criticize the coach and also think it's not solely because of the coach that the team didn't make the playoffs. Both of those things can be true.

I disagree with your interpretation of the two statements, but it's not important.

 

[Machinehead]

I disagree with your interpretation of the two statements, but it's not important.

You disagree with me in the interpretations of things I said??

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Chris Johnston also reporting that Gallant is at the top of the list, but NYR want to see if others shake loose. So don’t expect a hire soon.

I assume that means they are waiting to see if Burke/Hex fire Sullivan, which I seriously doubt.

That or the potential Carolina fall out.

If Pitt does get bounced in round 1 this year I think Sullivan is out, but I wouldn't count on that happening.

 

[Oscar Lindberg]

Chris Johnston also reporting that Gallant is at the top of the list, but NYR want to see if others shake loose. So don’t expect a hire soon.

I assume that means they are waiting to see if Burke/Hex fire Sullivan, which I seriously doubt.

This is the correct move. Gallant is probably the best of the “available” coaches but I’d much rather them wait to see if something happens with Sullivan.

Our job is desirable, I’m not worried about Gallant getting hired before things work themselves out with Sullivan

 

[2014nyr]

I'm curious as to which veterans Quinn didn't stand up to.

strome stands out - his quote basically telling quinn to f off in his message of being more aggressive, esp w/ respect to shooting...but really all of the top guys refused to adjust throughout his tenure. strome had a few mindblowing lines this year - couldn't believe his response to a question before the isles on if it was the biggest game to date in his rangers career - to the effect of they'd played in a lot of them - just delusional. the first quote though - its one thing if you're a player thats done it on the biggest stages to stiffen a bit at criticism. but for a guy who's done absolutely nothing - produced absolutely nothing in a big game or gotten anywhere closer than the playoff bubble to act above coaching was an absolute joke.

the post you quoted also mentioned him prioritizing winning over development - uhhh yea. its the nhl. the nhl is not a developmental league. you don't have a panarin, trouba, kreider, buchnevich, mika on a roster and say sorry guys not really worried about winning this year, need to get young guys ice time. the organization mantra from the top was they were playing to win every game. the kids came along just fine. putting them in spots they aren't ready for at the expense of what was best for the team is a horrible developmental culture. have you ever been in a locker room? because that would be a horrific developmental environment. horrific.

the entire quinn hates kids, quinn buries kids and kills their development narrative is so dumb its hardly worth acknowledging.

and it completely misses the things he could be fairly criticized for. for one - as mentioned above, he was never able to get some of the leaders to adapt. now that doesn't mean mika or panarin turn into dump and chase bruisers or change who they are. what it does mean is in games like the ones against the isles you recognize what isn't going to be there and commit to a game plan that protects against the breakdowns you were killed by the last 3 times you played. part of that may be coaching - he was never the best x's and o's guy - its entirely possible he didn't have much in the way of details that needed against certain opponents. but whether it was lack of strategy or refusal by the team to execute, we never got any better playing those games. thats a fair critique. additionally, while he was never given what could be considered anything near a complete roster, you could make the case he did little to maximize the options he did have. we had 2 high skill lines at almost all times, but soft and transition offense dependent. behind that we had a mix of youth and what became increasingly blah players. we didn't have ideal bottom 6 options, but this year with the kids who could really flash at times that was something. but the 4th line he just had no creativity with. kravy at least added some skill there, but pdg-howden-rooney was useless. we had a guy like lemieux with a personality and edge who never really got a commitment, a guy like gauthier who offered a skillset no one else on the team had who was constantly barred for bad penalties. i get both of them had downside - and take no issue with applying discipline, but those are guys who offered the lineup some diversity and upside. they could have made differences at points. i don't dislike any of the 3 guys i mentioned, but all 3 are just there. any one can be on a team, but together they were a waste of a shift at best. none were going to make a difference. he needed to have the same commitment to giving lemieux/goat opportunities to reign in the bad - because the good could have made us a much better team - that he did to getting howden opportunities to wear a jersey and fall down a lot. he didn't try a gauthier w/ strome/panarin who - if blackwell was a fit as a semi-quick puck chaser - why not take a look at the physical specimen with hands who can absolutely fly there? i mean i'm not sure they spent more than a combined 1 min outside their own zone those last 2 isles games. it literally could not have gotten worse. those are reasonable things to be critical of him for.

 

[RGY]

That's all well and good.

My point remains that whomever the next coach is, the slightest perceived screwup and there will be a group moaning that we hired an idiot.

If its Gallant/Brindamour you wont be hearing from me. Even if its Torts/Hartley/Boudreau/Julien/Babcock you wont be hearing from me. So long as they bring in experience I will be patient because I trust experience. And if it fails, so be it, but going the route of experience is the way to go.

 

[Chytilmania]

You damn kids with your hoola-hoops and Pac-Man video games!

Don't forget the Zima.

 

[smoneil]

Are you saying it's the fault of the coach or the players who didn't listen?

Since Strome is the speaker and there's a WE attached to it, we can assume that Panarin has to be part of the WE.

If the new coach wants N/S and Panarin doesn't do it, does he get traded? Panarin will never be that kind of player, no matter who coaches.

So, is the solution to make the roster play N/S and allow Panarin's line to freelance or should the coach bench Panarin if he disobeys or is the solution for everyone to play E/W, which wouldn't make much sense, considering where we think the team direction is headed?

It's not a one or the other. Panarin, Strome, Zib--they ALL played N/S when the situation called for it last season and in previous seasons. It's not their preferred brand of hockey, and they realized that they could ignore it this year because Quinn wouldn't draw a line in the sand. Both the players and the coach are at fault. It's easier to replace the coach. And that's what they did. I would hope, if the big 5 (if they are all still here next season) try to pull this again, the next coach sits them down for a game to send a message. Frankly, I'd be looking to move at least one (and Strome is the main target, as the most vocally brazen and as the least valuable of the four who can be moved) of them just so they won't walk in with the same mindset to start next season. It's never a good thing when a clique of players start thinking that they run the whole show.

 

[Number 9]

has a poll been done on quinn? keep or let go if you had to choose, no indifference.

 

[One Winged Angel]

the entire quinn hates kids, quinn buries kids and kills their development narrative is so dumb its hardly worth acknowledging.

I'm not saying he hates the kids, but...

1. You don't develop them as defensive players. Look at the greats. Yzerman, Modano, Sakic, Sundin, Forsberg... they all developed offensively first and then became great defensive players. Find me a player that started as a defensive player and became an elite offensive forward.

2. You put your young talents in positions to succeed, not fail. He didn't do that with Lafreniere or Kakko. He had Kravtsov playing with plugs. Sorry, but that's now how you develop young talent.

3. Lafreniere didn't play on a power play that for a vast majority of the year was a bottom-10 unit and if it wasn't for a couple of games against Philly and a stretch against Buffalo and NJ, it would have still been a bottom-10 unit. Why wouldn't you give your 1st overall pick an avenue to develop some confidence, especially when both units were struggling mightily?

You say the NHL isn't a developmental league. What did Nathan MacKinnon do then? Players develop at the NHL level. They don't just come in automatically ready. The ones that do are rare exceptions to the rule.

 

[mas0764]

has a poll been done on quinn? keep or let go if you had to choose, no indifference.

Well he was fired already so that would be a pretty meaningless poll.