Toggle sidebar

Confirmed with Link: David Quinn - New Rangers Coach (Officially official on 5/23)

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.

How does your feels-o-meter rate this signing?

  • Total voters
    248
Status
Not open for further replies.
Levitate said:
Man you are smarter than this. You're posting this just to rile people up aren't you.
Click to expand...

Naa lol
But I want answers.
This guy seems to be a mystery to most other than the BU fans that don't seem like they're gonna miss him very much.
Usually, if it walks like a duck...
 
  • Like
Reactions: eco's bones
Bleed Ranger Blue said:
Or, as evidenced by this board, fans usually become idiots when it comes to their head coach if they're around for more than 2 seasons.
Click to expand...

Or, as evidenced we could just ignore those fan bases that have witnessed him in action entirely (Shattenkirk,Smith) and just label him the best ever so we can feel better inside.

Listen, I'm not labeling this guy a bust but again, I'm no JG fan and do have my concerns.

On one side I'm excited to go in a different direction but the other side tells me it's a gamble.

We'll certainly find out..
 
NYR said:
Heavy forecheck and attacking D just doesn't exactly scream protect your own zone to me.
Hmm..Where have we seen that before?
Click to expand...
Have we? You sure you were watching Rangers hockey these past few years if you thought we forechecked hard and had d lead the rush. This information is readily available, and we dumped the puck readily because we weren't a good transition team. That's the fun perks of having terrible forechecking and defensive strategies that result in your team having the puck a lot less frequently than the other team.

Have you watched BU play these past few years?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Do you want ants, haveandare and Go Away Staal
NYR said:
Naa lol
But I want answers.
This guy seems to be a mystery to most other than the BU fans that don't seem like they're gonna miss him very much.
Usually, if it walks like a duck...
Click to expand...

If nothing else the hiring of Quinn certainly beats doing something certifiably stupid like hiring someone with no coaching experience at all like Mark Messier. Quinn does have a resume. He has been around but at the same time he's not some NHL retread. He's used to working with and motivating younger players.......and last I looked the Rangers have a plethora of them. There are veterans but the Rangers are going to be engaged in building a new and younger core. They will be the future of the team. There are former NHL coaches out there---some were pretty successful---some weren't. If you were to hire one--say Darryl Sutter you'd be giving him a team made up in large part of players under 25 including maybe even a couple teenagers. Sutter was successful coaching veteran teams--not developing players. It's not a good match IMO. This is meant at least in part to be an explanation of why the Rangers would go this route--the February letter that the Rangers put out to the media and fans laid out this plan and the way I see this is that this is the next logical step.
 
NYR said:
Or, as evidenced we could just ignore those fan bases that have witnessed him in action entirely (Shattenkirk,Smith) and just label him the best ever so we can feel better inside.

Listen, I'm not labeling this guy a bust but again, I'm no JG fan and do have my concerns.

On one side I'm excited to go in a different direction but the other side tells me it's a gamble.

We'll certainly find out..
Click to expand...

Every coach is a gamble. And often times, its about the right coach with the right team at the right time -- something that gets completely lost with this board's propensity to blame the coach for virtually everything. We'll see what happens. But I see a college coach like this as being more likely to gel with this team than an NHL retread with a "track record"
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheTakedown
Mac n Gs said:
Have we? You sure you were watching Rangers hockey these past few years if you thought we forechecked hard and had d lead the rush. This information is readily available, and we dumped the puck readily because we weren't a good transition team. That's the fun perks of having terrible forechecking and defensive strategies that result in your team having the puck a lot less frequently than the other team.

Have you watched BU play these past few years?
Click to expand...

Bro..I'm not looking to turn this into a Quinn bashing thread.

I have diehard NYR friends of 40 years in MA that are glued to BU hockey and I trust their opinions more than nearly anyone in this forum.

Have I "heard/seen" this type of style of play?
Quite frankly, YES.
AV had fully intended on doing exactly what Quinn is looking to do but failed.
Not having the horses to implement such system is a whole different convo.

Quinn gets a fresh start with the youngsters so again, that's a different convo.

Can he teach this team how to clear the crease and guard the house??

That remains to be seen..
 
eco's bones said:
If nothing else the hiring of Quinn certainly beats doing something certifiably stupid like hiring someone with no coaching experience at all like Mark Messier. Quinn does have a resume. He has been around but at the same time he's not some NHL retread. He's used to working with and motivating younger players.......and last I looked the Rangers have a plethora of them. There are veterans but the Rangers are going to be engaged in building a new and younger core. They will be the future of the team. There are former NHL coaches out there---some were pretty successful---some weren't. If you were to hire one--say Darryl Sutter you'd be giving him a team made up in large part of players under 25 including maybe even a couple teenagers. Sutter was successful coaching veteran teams--not developing players. It's not a good match IMO. This is meant at least in part to be an explanation of why the Rangers would go this route--the February letter that the Rangers put out to the media and fans laid out this plan and the way I see this is that this is the next logical step.
Click to expand...

I agree mostly but again..I'm not looking to bash Quinn but it's more so the style+Advanced Stats kind of thing I don't necessarily like.
These guys always seem to have a one sided view and that's just offense.
While I l absolutely love that part of the game, I need to see a solid defensive structure in place.
 
Mac n Gs said:
Have we? You sure you were watching Rangers hockey these past few years if you thought we forechecked hard and had d lead the rush. This information is readily available, and we dumped the puck readily because we weren't a good transition team. That's the fun perks of having terrible forechecking and defensive strategies that result in your team having the puck a lot less frequently than the other team.

Have you watched BU play these past few years?
Click to expand...

You're wasting your time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UnSandvich, Alluckks, Bozle and 2 others
NYR said:
I agree mostly but again..I'm not looking to bash Quinn but it's more so the style+Advanced Stats kind of thing I don't necessarily like.
These guys always seem to have a one sided view and that's just offense.
While I l absolutely love that part of the game, I need to see a solid defensive structure in place.
Click to expand...

If the Rangers go back to a zone style defense the team will tighten up in it's own end---and yeah you do want D who can move the puck smartly and quickly up the ice and having a hard forecheck is a really good thing as well. The game is predicated these days not only on puck possession but when you don't have possession of taking time and space away from the other side. A passive defensive system even if it's a zone is not going to work well. The team still has to pressure the puck.

Keeping in mind as well---that with so many younger players it might take another year or so for the Rangers to get back to even contending for a playoff spot. In the meantime those younger players are going to need a coaching staff that can work with them to develop better and faster. This is part of what Mr. Quinn is going to be asked to do. It's not something that I think that Mr. Sutter or Mr. Hitchcock would have patience for and those guys need veterans and those guys were used to elite players like Seguin, Benn, Kopitar, Doughty. They're used to winning at the NHL level and any season their teams are not contenders is a lost season for them.

Is Quinn the absolutely best guy or even good enough? Well---time is going to tell but there would be these same questions about any other guy the Rangers might have chosen so there's no reason to sweat or fret too much about this. We're not going to find out how well it works until we see his team in action for an extended period of time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: haveandare
Bleed Ranger Blue said:
Every coach is a gamble. And often times, its about the right coach with the right team at the right time -- something that gets completely lost with this board's propensity to blame the coach for virtually everything. We'll see what happens. But I see a college coach like this as being more likely to gel with this team than an NHL retread with a "track record"
Click to expand...

Fair enough
 
Irishguy42 said:
Quinn is noted as being largely responsible for the success of the BU defense while he was an assistant there.
Click to expand...

But heavy forecheck = no attention to D. The only way you can tell if a team cares about their own end is by how their D clear the crease... As long as you ignore the fact that an element like that is either in a player or it isn't.

It's been spelled out by multiple people in both this thread and the other one a thousand times already, but some don't want to listen and would rather spend their time polluting this thread with their unsubstantiated bull shit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Irishguy42
NYR said:
Bro..I'm not looking to turn this into a Quinn bashing thread.

I have diehard NYR friends of 40 years in MA that are glued to BU hockey and I trust their opinions more than nearly anyone in this forum.

Have I "heard/seen" this type of style of play?
Quite frankly, YES.
AV had fully intended on doing exactly what Quinn is looking to do but failed.
Not having the horses to implement such system is a whole different convo.

Quinn gets a fresh start with the youngsters so again, that's a different convo.

Can he teach this team how to clear the crease and guard the house??

That remains to be seen..
Click to expand...
I’m not getting into why I disliked AV. I’ve written it ad nauseum. The numbers are there, these things are measured, and you are incorrect in your assessment. Also, none of what you said has anything to do with forechecking hard and activating defenseman on the rush. BU teams had good defensive structure since Quinn utilized USDP tactics.

Let’s just agree to disagree and come back to evaluating Quinn once he’s actually HC and we have results under him.
 
eco's bones said:
If the Rangers go back to a zone style defense the team will tighten up in it's own end---and yeah you do want D who can move the puck smartly and quickly up the ice and having a hard forecheck is a really good thing as well. The game is predicated these days not only on puck possession but when you don't have possession of taking time and space away from the other side. A passive defensive system even if it's a zone is not going to work well. The team still has to pressure the puck.

Keeping in mind as well---that with so many younger players it might take another year or so for the Rangers to get back to even contending for a playoff spot. In the meantime those younger players are going to need a coaching staff that can work with them to develop better and faster. This is part of what Mr. Quinn is going to be asked to do. It's not something that I think that Mr. Sutter or Mr. Hitchcock would have patience for and those guys need veterans and those guys were used to elite players like Seguin, Benn, Kopitar, Doughty. They're used to winning at the NHL level and any season their teams are not contenders is a lost season for them.

Is Quinn the absolutely best guy or even good enough? Well---time is going to tell but there would be these same questions about any other guy the Rangers might have chosen so there's no reason to sweat or fret too much about this. We're not going to find out how well it works until we see his team in action for an extended period of time.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I hear you.
I certainly don't want to see anything passive.

I feel that the system doesn't really need to be over complicated as hard work usually dictates the outcome of games.

In my mind, we need a hybrid system so instead of explaining the whole thing from a cell phone lol,
figure..If you could mish mash AV, Torts and Hitchcock all together and form a system..

The latter especially likes to play in tight groups of 5.
Tight short passing and heavy pressure in the blue.
Crash the net.

On D
Stand up and kill a play on the NZ
Block shots and lanes.
Clear the crease at all costs.

It's really all just playoff hockey with an attitude..
 
Mac n Gs said:
I’m not getting into why I disliked AV. I’ve written it ad nauseum. The numbers are there, these things are measured, and you are incorrect in your assessment. Also, none of what you said has anything to do with forechecking hard and activating defenseman on the rush. BU teams had good defensive structure since Quinn utilized USDP tactics.

Let’s just agree to disagree and come back to evaluating Quinn once he’s actually HC and we have results under him.
Click to expand...

We can agree on the AV scenario but the numbers? Naa lol

OK..Agree to disagree and revisit soon.

I expect to be tagging you after the season starts @Mac n Gs but not Bozo and the Staal clown ;)
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom