Player Discussion David Quinn: Part II

[True Blue]

I gave him a good solid B. A lot to like. I am confused by his unwillingness to try Anderson with better players. I worry what will happen to Lindgren once Staal is ready to return. I also don't get why the fourth line is being filled with the likes of Haley, Smith et al rather than kids.

Am with you on Anderson. Oh, and you gave the same grade that I did. I was confused as to why Lindgren was the one that was scratched when Staal returned. But would like to believe that Lindgren is not going to be the one out of the line up this time. I think that his play has solidified him. Or so I hope.

The 4th line? Eh. I mean what kids do you want to see play 5 minutes on the 4th line? I agree that in a best case scenario, the lines are rolled. But for whatever reason, be it not in Quinn's wheelhouse or lack of proper personnel or whatever, that has not been Quinn's mo. I would rather not see Andersson getting wasted on said line. Is Haley the best choice? Maybe not. But he brings an element that is missing and frankly, for his 5 minutes is fine. Smith? If his contract was $1.5m, would we be complaining about such a player on the 4th line? Jumps back to PK as DeAngelo is not trusted to do it. And frankly neither is Fox and that allows them to play other minutes? There are worse people that I could take there rather than Smith.

 

[haveandare]

Yes, Fox, ADA, Buchnevich; it's a bit concerning that the guys who have progressed the most had much of their developmental years away from Quinn.

I don't think Kakko has gotten better at all. He looked just as helpless game 24 at 5v5 as he did game 1.

Hajek isn't sort of surviving. He's getting his teeth kicked in every night. He's actually a couple of weeks older than Adam Fox. We should be seeing more from him.

Like I said, I don't really care, I'm just confused as to how Quinn is getting mostly passing grades and yet there seems to be a consensus on here that this team doesn't compete hard enough. That's 100% on your coach.

Our young players, in aggregate, have not been impressive this year. Take Fox out, and they've downright failed.

I think the Artemi Panarin Show is masking how ugly this season has been.

Developmental years are the years a player developed in. For DeAngelo that’s last year and this year. For Buch it’s last year and especially this year. Fox it’s harder to say because we don’t really know what he would have looked like in the NHL last year but it’s not unreasonable to suspect he wouldn’t be quite this good. I’m not at all concerned that these guys played younger years with other coaches. Whatever they got from those guys hasn’t been incubating without effect only to finally start working years later under another coach. I’d also suggest Chytil has progressed most from last year and saying it’s because of 9 games under another coach instead of dozens under Quinn doesn’t check out to me.

Agre to disagree on Kakko. I think he’s had some very good games 5 on 5 more recently though it’s been up and down overall.

Hajek has also had good games that he wouldn’t have been capable of last year. He’s been getting killed the last few but not all year. That happens with young players, they don’t always just take off and never look back.

I don’t think there’s a consensus they aren’t competing enough. There’s some people saying that just like there’s some people saying almost everything.

Our young players have absolutely been impressive. Fox is excellent most nights. Lindgren has been very good and much improved from previous stints. Chytil is like a different player and has been playing like a top 6 forward in both ends of the ice. That’s 2 rookies and a 20 year old all playing very well. Lemieux is a young guy also having a very good year.

Quinn isn’t above reproach and it’s not all roses so far but I absolutely don’t agree that players aren’t improving under him.

 

[True Blue]

Are you talking about developing players or winning? Because the main point of your argument seems to be that these are two distinct things, the former of which is suppose to be Quinn's specialty, and now they seemed to be haphazardly smashed back together out of convenience.

Not that it matters, he pretty clearly can do both. Obviously Trotz can develop players, he's been an NHL coach for 20 years. Even the best teams have player that need developing and if a coach isn't doing that he is not staying employed for 2 straight decades. And obviously he can win. He just won a cup a year and a half ago.

With all due respect, as I am about done arguing this with the other poster, I really do not feel like rehashing this as things have calmed down. But in high strokes, my argument was why I believe that Gorton chose Quinn and never had any thoughts whatsoever about a guy like Trotz. Please note, that I am not denigrating Trotz at all. I have stated why I believe he would not have had any more success than Quinn has with this team and why may have been a worse choice for THIS team.

I'm not sure what's funnier: the absurdity of having to defend a coach who has won 2 Jack Adams trophies and a cup in the last 3 years or the grossness of defending the current coach of the Islanders. Barf.

Not sure what you want me to tell you here. People debate many things. If I agree that Trotz was not the right person for this team and Quinn was, what should I do when his name is being constantly pounded as the hire that should have been made? Seems to me I can either 1) ignore it or 2) choose to debate it. That is the way discussions between two people typically work.

The argument shouldn't be "Gorton should have make all efforts to hire Trotz. Just look at what accomplished in Nashville".

The argument should be "Gorton should have made all efforts to hire Trotz. He is a proven coach and he is a better coach."

I could not agree more.

Now there is a pretty easy counter to that argument: "Trotz probably didn't want to come to the Rangers". That's the smart response to any "Why didnt we hire Trotz?!?" questions and the easiest way to shut down a prolonged and tedious discussion before it begins. Going this route allows us to bypass the "we don't need the best coach, we need a development coach!" argument and and lets us all avoid us having to pretend that a good coach and a development coach don't do the same things.

That may be a good counter argument for you, but I do not at all believe it to be accurate. And again, as such what would you like me to do? I do not believe that Gorton did not wait to hire Trotz because he thought that Trotz would not want to come to the Rangers. I believe that Gorton had no intentions whatsoever to hire a Trotz, or a Quennville for that matter. I believe that he made his selections based on criteria that he found important.

It is pretty silly to dumb down an argument to Trotz probably didn't want to come to the Rangers". That's the smart response to any "Why didnt we hire Trotz?!?" questions and the easiest way to shut down a prolonged and tedious discussion before it begins.

Sure that is easy, but it was also not what was being debated. So again, not sure why you feel it necessary to state that a response should have been tailored in a way that had nothing at all to do with what I felt the correct answer was. I do not think that Trotz had any part in Gorton's plan, so why pretend like he did?

But what do I know? 'Just another poster on a message board.

 

[aufheben]

Kakko was improving rapidly before he got the flu.

 

[JHS]

Are you talking about developing players or winning? Because the main point of your argument seems to be that these are two distinct things, the former of which is suppose to be Quinn's specialty, and now they seemed to be haphazardly smashed back together out of convenience.

Not that it matters, he pretty clearly can do both. Obviously Trotz can develop players, he's been an NHL coach for 20 years. Even the best teams have player that need developing and if a coach isn't doing that he is not staying employed for 2 straight decades. And obviously he can win. He just won a cup a year and a half ago.

I'm not sure what's funnier: the absurdity of having to defend a coach who has won 2 Jack Adams trophies and a cup in the last 3 years or the grossness of defending the current coach of the Islanders. Barf.




The argument shouldn't be "Gorton should have make all efforts to hire Trotz. Just look at what accomplished in Nashville".

The argument should be "Gorton should have made all efforts to hire Trotz. He is a proven coach and he is a better coach."

Now there is a pretty easy counter to that argument: "Trotz probably didn't want to come to the Rangers". That's the smart response to any "Why didnt we hire Trotz?!?" questions and the easiest way to shut down a prolonged and tedious discussion before it begins. Going this route allows us to bypass the "we don't need the best coach, we need a development coach!" argument and and lets us all avoid us having to pretend that a good coach and a development coach don't do the same things.

I appreciate this because it fairly reflects the debate over the hire of Quinn vs Trotz. @True Blue and I have had it out over this. I think we’ve agreed to disagree at this point and that’s fine. I’ve enjoyed the spirited discussion and I’m hopeful he has too!

 

[DanielBrassard]

Kakko was improving rapidly before he got the flu.

Well he was doing great on the PP, 5v5 not much different than now.

 

[Machinehead]

What I am confused about is where do you believe these players were developing? Buchnevich developed a lot under AV? Fox developed his entire game in Harvard, did he? Maybe DeAngelo developed what he needed in Phoenix?

The point is that they had experience in other systems.

Quinn seems to be struggling with guys who go straight from the draft to the Rangers. I wonder if he's struggling with transitioning himself from college to NHL.

Of course, that would exclude Hajek, but I was never crazy about him anyway.

 

[Machinehead]

Well he was doing great on the PP, 5v5 not much different than now.

And the PP thing has nothing to do with the flu. It's because we took him off of it to accommodate Ryan Strome.

 

[NYR]

I mean you can find 1,00,000 things that look terrible per game if you want to use one still shot. What a useless tweet.

You're speaking to the point but won't acknowledge it.
This is a red zone scoring chance that happens over and over, game after game yet nothing is done to address it..

 

[NYR]

This screenshot really convinced me that 'the system' and the coach is garbage

Watch the game..Maybe it will make sense...Eventually

 

[NYR]

Ok trying again-- Yes I think Trotz would make this team better in every possible way. Your ignoring of a cup winning team is literally comical. Way more talented teams failed to win the cup. The Caps played over their heads during that cup run.

Regarding Nashville-- if Trotz did not have an ability to develop an organization why would an expansion team keep him around for over 10 years??? I honest;y can't even believe you keep trying to prove the opposite that somehow an inability to get an under talented Nashville organization into the playoffs is somehow a prediction of what's to come for the his hypothetical coaching career as a Rangers coach. Listen, one of the best general managers in NHL history, Lou Lamoriello agrees with me-- he hired Trotz literally a week after he became available.

If you want to support your argument( which I'm having almost an impossible time following at this point) why don't you point to success Quinn has had? Why do you keep trying to undercut my fairly obvious and straight forward critique by increasingly grasping at straws and making illogical leaps( like Trotz's coaching career would literally mirror itself with the Rangers as it did with Nashville?) You like to ask people questions and demand an answer. So here's my question, What has Quinn done well as an NHL coach? Be specific

I STILL don't get whatever "point" he's trying to make yet he rambles on all day long with the multi-quote posts.
Not sure how the salty people make a living during the day lol

 

[offdacrossbar]

Developmental years are the years a player developed in. For DeAngelo that’s last year and this year. For Buch it’s last year and especially this year. Fox it’s harder to say because we don’t really know what he would have looked like in the NHL last year but it’s not unreasonable to suspect he wouldn’t be quite this good. I’m not at all concerned that these guys played younger years with other coaches. Whatever they got from those guys hasn’t been incubating without effect only to finally start working years later under another coach. I’d also suggest Chytil has progressed most from last year and saying it’s because of 9 games under another coach instead of dozens under Quinn doesn’t check out to me.

Agre to disagree on Kakko. I think he’s had some very good games 5 on 5 more recently though it’s been up and down overall.

Hajek has also had good games that he wouldn’t have been capable of last year. He’s been getting killed the last few but not all year. That happens with young players, they don’t always just take off and never look back.

I don’t think there’s a consensus they aren’t competing enough. There’s some people saying that just like there’s some people saying almost everything.

Our young players have absolutely been impressive. Fox is excellent most nights. Lindgren has been very good and much improved from previous stints. Chytil is like a different player and has been playing like a top 6 forward in both ends of the ice. That’s 2 rookies and a 20 year old all playing very well. Lemieux is a young guy also having a very good year.

Quinn isn’t above reproach and it’s not all roses so far but I absolutely don’t agree that players aren’t improving under him.

pretty much agree

quinn has had his moments but the guys you mentioned are progressing.

to a man, they all love playing for quinn as well, especially the young guys.

 

[Blue Blooded]

Just look at how Washington handles their talent on the PP. Backstrom and Kuz are on the same side (one half boards one below goal line) and they feed Oshie in the Slot, Carlsson on the Point and Ovie on the Opposite sides. 2 lefties on one side, 3 on right. We just need to flip it for our guys.

Forgive the formatting.

Kreider

Panarin Ziba KK ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ *Fox and Ada get flipped for whoever is hot

Fox/AdA*


Lemieux

Strome Chytil Buch ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ (Trouba likely odd man out)

Ada/Fox/Trouba

or

Lemiuex

Ada/Fox Chytil Buch ~~~~~~~~~~~ Strome is odd man out for 2 dmen


Trouba

Completely agree.

@WojtekWolski86 Awesome handle. Are you a big fan?

Wolski was such an underrated Ranger, Wolski-Stepan-Zuccarello from 2010-11 is one of our best lines this decade in terms of on-ice metrics. Too bad Torts didn't keep them together for the playoffs.

 

[True Blue]

I STILL don't get whatever "point" he's trying to make yet he rambles on all day long with the multi-quote posts.

RIF: Reading is Fundamental

Not sure how the salty people make a living during the day lol

Guessing the same way unsalty ones do

Watch the game..Maybe it will make sense...Eventually

Hello? Oh, hold on. The phone is for you. It's the kettle.

 

[True Blue]

The point is that they had experience in other systems.

DeAngelo's experience playing in the minor league systems of Tampa and Phoenix is what is making him play better today as opposed to the current coaching staff? Fox's experience in Harvard's system is what is making him play well today? Why not also thank his pee wee coach? I am sure the had more to do with Fox the player than Quinn as well.

Buchnevich's improvement over the last two years was a result of playing in AV's system as opposed to Quinn?

This is logical thinking?

Quinn seems to be struggling with guys who go straight from the draft to the Rangers. I wonder if he's struggling with transitioning himself from college to NHL.

Who are you pointing to? Kakko? Who else went straight from the draft to the Rangers? I do not suppose Kakko's struggles have anything to do with him being an 18 year old adjusting to the best league in the world?

Who else is there? Chytil? Yeah, look at him struggle.

 

[motopanekeku]

Developmental years are the years a player developed in. For DeAngelo that’s last year and this year. For Buch it’s last year and especially this year. Fox it’s harder to say because we don’t really know what he would have looked like in the NHL last year but it’s not unreasonable to suspect he wouldn’t be quite this good. I’m not at all concerned that these guys played younger years with other coaches. Whatever they got from those guys hasn’t been incubating without effect only to finally start working years later under another coach. I’d also suggest Chytil has progressed most from last year and saying it’s because of 9 games under another coach instead of dozens under Quinn doesn’t check out to me.

Agre to disagree on Kakko. I think he’s had some very good games 5 on 5 more recently though it’s been up and down overall.

Hajek has also had good games that he wouldn’t have been capable of last year. He’s been getting killed the last few but not all year. That happens with young players, they don’t always just take off and never look back.

I don’t think there’s a consensus they aren’t competing enough. There’s some people saying that just like there’s some people saying almost everything.

Our young players have absolutely been impressive. Fox is excellent most nights. Lindgren has been very good and much improved from previous stints. Chytil is like a different player and has been playing like a top 6 forward in both ends of the ice. That’s 2 rookies and a 20 year old all playing very well. Lemieux is a young guy also having a very good year.

Quinn isn’t above reproach and it’s not all roses so far but I absolutely don’t agree that players aren’t improving under him.

Thank you. For all the kids and prospects in and out of the roster this year our hit rate is pretty good. You can see who will continue to improve as the talent is clearly there. As for the others there is still time. No team is 100% with their prospects. So far it appears things are being handled just fine. In 2-3 years when this roster has taken form we can realistically scrutinize the coaches when the players are underperforming.

 

[motopanekeku]

The point is that they had experience in other systems.

Quinn seems to be struggling with guys who go straight from the draft to the Rangers. I wonder if he's struggling with transitioning himself from college to NHL.

Of course, that would exclude Hajek, but I was never crazy about him anyway.

I don't see how young inexperienced players struggling in their first real turns in the NHL translates to coach Quinn struggling. The horses are not ready. When they clearly are and the team still sucks we can get on the coach but not just because a few of our prospects aren't immediately lighting up the league.

 

[Athor]

What's clear is that some people are really putting these prospects on a pedestal. There's individual mistakes happening all over the ice that the coach has no control over. I guess you see what you want to see.

 

[McRanger]

With all due respect...

Hey I didn't want to get back into it either, I just pointed out there is no reason to rag on Trotz to pump up Quinn. You said that context was needed (without actually adding any context as to why the coach of a perpetually crappy drafting expansion franchise never had any playoff success) and the whole argument seemed a bit crazy when you consider 1) Trotz resume and 2) the coach on the other side of the argument literally hasn't done anything at the NHL level. I even conceded a point that I think is bunk ("Quinn is probably the best coach for our developing team") just to hand you the win so we wouldn't have to go over this again.

So I apologize for my part in dragging this on and I guess we can agree to disagree.

For what its worth I agree that, right or wrong, Gorton had no interest in a big name coach. I just disagree with what his reasons were. While I can't see the logic of hiring someone just got a few young players, I can see the logic of not wanting to give out a massive contract to a high profile coach (sending expectations of winning through the roof) of a team that is about to be torn apart and spend a few seasons losing.

 

[True Blue]

So I apologize for my part in dragging this on and I guess we can agree to disagree.

No worries. It is HF and if nothing else, we are masters of beating a horse dead, resurrecting it and then beating it to death again....and again.

One of the obvious problems comes with debating in nothing but print. Some things get lost and some points just do not come across as intended. Sometimes just simply agreeing to disagree is the wisest course of action.

UnlessOfCourseYouWriteLikeThis.......then the issues are legion.

 

[Machinehead]

DeAngelo's experience playing in the minor league systems of Tampa and Phoenix is what is making him play better today as opposed to the current coaching staff? Fox's experience in Harvard's system is what is making him play well today? Why not also thank his pee wee coach? I am sure the had more to do with Fox the player than Quinn as well.

Buchnevich's improvement over the last two years was a result of playing in AV's system as opposed to Quinn?

This is logical thinking?

Who are you pointing to? Kakko? Who else went straight from the draft to the Rangers? I do not suppose Kakko's struggles have anything to do with him being an 18 year old adjusting to the best league in the world?

Who else is there? Chytil? Yeah, look at him struggle.

Ok, I'll give you Fox. The point I'm making is that considering DeAngelo and Buchnevich prospects under Quinn at 24 years old is disingenuous.

With the exception of Fox and Chytil, every prospect has been horrendous this year. Not struggling -- horrendous.

 

[Machinehead]

I don't see how young inexperienced players struggling in their first real turns in the NHL translates to coach Quinn struggling. The horses are not ready. When they clearly are and the team still sucks we can get on the coach but not just because a few of our prospects aren't immediately lighting up the league.

There's a middle ground between immediately lighting up the league and getting bodied every single night.

 

[motopanekeku]

There's a middle ground between immediately lighting up the league and getting bodied every single night.

Haha true. That's something I look to guys like Lemieux, Lindgren, and DeAngelo to develop as players and as a team culture. Of course it's the responsibility of the coaches to develop that in the players but take Kreider for example. That dude is not a result of any sort of coaching defect, he's just not able to smartly use his physicality. Kreider should be the beast that we all know he is but he hasn't been but in flashes for us. He's a guy who I wish had it all together. That being said I believe he's built for the playoffs where calls that normally get him in trouble and hold him back mostly aren't an issue.

 

[True Blue]

Ok, I'll give you Fox. The point I'm making is that considering DeAngelo and Buchnevich prospects under Quinn at 24 years old is disingenuous.

So again, are you attributing the growth in DeAngelo's game to the time that he spent in minor leagues for both Tampa and Phoenix? Who cares that he is 24? That is how long it took for him to get here and take meaningful steps forward in his career. The two years that he spent directly under Quinn is when his career began to grow. I would think that has more bearing than time spent in the minors of other franchises.

Same with Buch. Who cares that he is 24? However long it has taken him to get going is however long it took him to get going. Are you attributing the growth that his game has shown in the last two years to the two years playing under AV? Or to his time in Russia? Again, same as with DeAngelo, his game has grown by leaps and bounds when spent directly under Quinn. I would also attribute some more weight to that than to AV or Russia.

With the exception of Fox and Chytil, every prospect has been horrendous this year. Not struggling -- horrendous.

Lindgren has looked just fine. Lemieux has looked just fine. Hajek has not been lighting the world on fire, but I have no idea how you can honestly characterize his game as "horrendous". Frankly same goes for Kakko. If anything is disingenuous, it is calling these two "horrendous".

So that leaves Howden and Andersson. Is that it? Is that your "horrendous" characterization? Ignore the majority and strictly focus on these two?

 

[Mikos87]

How much is this on Quinn, and how much is due to the fact that the roster isn't quite there yet (and even if it were, would still need a couple of years of development)?

I'd say 75-25 on coaching to gm. Coaches control ice time, schemes, planning. The line up is inexperienced, and Gorts self inflicted cap crippling prevents signing good 4th liners. But the rest is on the coach.

He can control who he ices out there. There is not a single playoff caliber team past game 60 that plays 3 lines in today's NHL. That's been proven out for the better part of the decade. They can try a bunch of call-ups and see who grabs that role rather than it being a 3-7 minute a night breather for the other guys.

They can also double shift Bread and others to involve more guys.