Player Discussion David Quinn: Part II

[JHS]

Not sure what is so cynical by saying that what he said is what I would expect anyone to say during the introduction conference. Not sure where the disrespect is, but whatever.

Ahh, yes. The silent majority that is completely on your side, that unfortunately do not make themselves heard at all to take up your cause.

If we believe the numbers in the poll, 55% of the board gave him a B. Nearly 30% gave him a C. Most of the conversations that have been had reflect that type of thinking. That does not lead me to believe that there is a silent majority who seems to have it out for Quinn.

Again, what it boils down to is that you are upset by the fact that people do not seem to be joining you in railing against Quinn. Since we both know that the logic of why that is will not change your position at ll, I am not really sure what to tell you. You can either continue to rail and get more upset when people do not join the cause or rethink the position. Either way, we seem to be right back where we started here.

The other way to look at the results of the poll is about 40% of the voters don't give him above a C even with the team performing better. But we could skew results all we want.

Please stop putting emotions on me. If you are getting frustrated with me-- ok but I'm fine debating this for as long as possible. I've been an island on this forum many times and really don't mind it. In fact I think it advances the dialogue here if we all just don't agree all the time.

 

[True Blue]

The other way to look at the results of the poll is about 40% of the voters don't give him above a C even with the team performing better. But we could skew results all we want.

Considering the fact that that I listed the percentages not sure what is being skewed. The majority did however give a B. Or are you disputing this?

Please stop putting emotions on me. If you are getting frustrated with me-- ok but I'm fine debating this for as long as possible. I've been an island on this forum many times and really don't mind it. In fact I think it advances the dialogue here if we all just don't agree all the time.

Who putting emotions on you? This is your statement, is it not?

Guilty as charged to your accusation of getting frustrated by people who want to give blanket passes to the entire organization.

I am certainly not frustrated. However, I do not think that we are making any new points to each other.

 

[JHS]

Considering the fact that that I listed the percentages not sure what is being skewed. The majority did however give a B. Or are you disputing this?

Who putting emotions on you? This is your statement, is it not?

Guilty as charged to your accusation of getting frustrated by people who want to give blanket passes to the entire organization.

I am certainly not frustrated. However, I do not think that we are making any new points to each other.

I think we agree on one thing-- we are not saying anything else new to each other at this point

 

[True Blue]

I think we agree on one thing-- we are not saying anything else new to each other at this point

I disagree

 

[JHS]

I disagree

I expect nothing less at this point.

 

[NYR]

I expect nothing less at this point.

 

[RGY]

I am happy to defend DQ, but this is where he needs to be better at coaching in the NHL. Its a long season. You need to settle down. You need to play for the point under 10 in the 3rd. Instead he is letting these guys do whatever the f*** they want. Trying for low percentage long passes down the ice. Not getting pucks deep and going to work. Just absolutely f***ing asinine. TERRIBLE. Its a bad job by the coach. You need to get control of your team and make the short simple pass to exit the zone and work your way through the neutral zone for a dump in. It was bound to happen that they would commit a turnover and lead to the GWG.

So incredibly frustrating because they deserved better. They played a strong game. But you need to tighten up. You have the two rookies on the ice for the last two minutes right there.

 

[JHS]

I am happy to defend DQ, but this is where he needs to be better at coaching in the NHL. Its a long season. You need to settle down. You need to play for the point under 10 in the 3rd. Instead he is letting these guys do whatever the **** they want. Trying for low percentage long passes down the ice. Not getting pucks deep and going to work. Just absolutely ****ing asinine. TERRIBLE. Its a bad job by the coach. You need to get control of your team and make the short simple pass to exit the zone and work your way through the neutral zone for a dump in. It was bound to happen that they would commit a turnover and lead to the GWG.

So incredibly frustrating because they deserved better. They played a strong game. But you need to tighten up. You have the two rookies on the ice for the last two minutes right there.

Just made the point in the game day thread that the 4th line was also in the ice with a minute to go in a tie game. Coach literally cost them a point. It’s blatant stuff like this!

 

[RGY]

Just made the point that the 4th line was also in the ice with a minute to go in a tie game. Coach literally cost them a point. It’s blatant stuff like this!

I still like Quinn. I still think he does a lot of good. But tonight was inexcusable. And its concerning that he either doesn’t have a hold/control of his team to slow them down and get them to tighten up when needed OR he isn’t even preaching that and is allowing pond hockey as someone else said.

 

[will1066]

I still like Quinn. I still think he does a lot of good. But tonight was inexcusable. And its concerning that he either doesn’t have a hold/control of his team to slow them down and get them to tighten up when needed OR he isn’t even preaching that and is allowing pond hockey as someone else said.

The player leaders have to be accountable too. They've gotta play by example. The kids will pick up on it.

 

[RGY]

The player leaders have to be accountable too. They've gotta play by example. The kids will pick up on it.

Normally i would use this as part of the equation, but this all falls on the coach. He has to step in and put an end to it. They had a TV timeout for him to get that message across. He didnt.

 

[JHS]

It’s so much more than that though. I was at tonight’s game vs the Canadians. I was blown away by how many simple coaching mistakes were made. Starting the 4th line on offensive zone starts when the team needs to build momentum after TV time outs, putting the 4th line out there with 1:30 to go in a tie game are the two that jump out at me immediately. This can’t be how this team gets better. But I will give Quinn some credit, he saw how brutal Buch was/is playing and steadily moved him down the lines eventually landing him on the 4th.

 

[RGY]

I am pretty sure it was technically the 3rd line on the ice for the goal, no?

But Lindgren-Fox....i think thats a bad move. Go back to Skjei-Trouba there. Wear them thin and lose with them.

 

[Rempe73]

I don’t know how some people can say development takes time, yet blame the coach for losing some games with a roster full of young, developing players.

 

[Peltz]

Seems like people only come into this thread to bash the coach after a loss, but are conspicuously absent after a win. It's far easier to criticize than it is to spot good coaching.

 

[Anzi]

Seems like people only come into this thread to bash the coach after a loss, but are conspicuously absent after a win. It's far easier to criticize than it is to spot good coaching.

I wouldn't call the most recent win a result of good coaching

 

[JHS]

I wouldn't call the most recent win a result of good coaching

Right- nor would anyone watches the game. Whenever the goalie plays unbelievable the Rangers win. Whenever the goalie plays average or worse, the Rangers lose. Certainly the defensive structure does not get any better!

The only amazing coach on the staff is Benoit Allaire.

 

[True Blue]

Whenever the goalie plays unbelievable the Rangers win. Whenever the goalie plays average or worse, the Rangers lose. Certainly the defensive structure does not get any better!

The only amazing coach on the staff is Benoit Allaire.

So the ONLY games the Rangers won are games in which the goalies stole games? Just want to be crystal clear as that is exactly what you are stating.

Right- nor would anyone watches the game.

Wrong - Anyone who watches the games would recognize the overall brilliance of the coaching staff.......See how easy that was? Let's try to stay away from little items like this, shall we?

 

[lemonybergamot]

Whatever misconduct the Dallas coach did, hopefully Quinn doesn't

 

[True Blue]

Whatever misconduct the Dallas coach did, hopefully Quinn doesn't

This is outright stupidity.

Just when you thought some of the things on this board could not sink any further........

 

[lemonybergamot]

This is outright stupidity.

Just when you thought some of the things on this board could not sink any further........

Just because he took Chytil and Howden out for breakfasts, doesn't mean he doesn't/couldn't have skeletons in the closet too. Just makes you wonder a bit now. Rangers wanted to hire Montgomery too, didnt they?

 

[Oscar Lindberg]

Just makes you wonder a bit now. Rangers wanted to hire Montgomery too, didnt they?

Yes, he was their first choice. They made an offer to him that was more than what Dallas gave him

he declined because he didn’t want to coach in NYC and a rebuilding team

 

[JHS]

So the ONLY games the Rangers won are games in which the goalies stole games? Just want to be crystal clear as that is exactly what you are stating.

Wrong - Anyone who watches the games would recognize the overall brilliance of the coaching staff.......See how easy that was? Let's try to stay away from little items like this, shall we?

Ohhh I see you are back! How lucky we all are- ummmmm yeah I’d stand by my statement that the Rangers win games when their goaltenders play amazing. No one said “the only games they win..”

Just curious, where were you when Quinn cost the team a point at worst by putting the 4th line out there with a minute to go in the Montreal game? Just curious

 

[True Blue]

Just because he took Chytil and Howden out for breakfasts, doesn't mean he doesn't/couldn't have skeletons in the closet too.

You could apply that statement to anyone in the world.

Just makes you wonder a bit now.

Not even a little bit. And am sure that I am not going on a limb to say that applies to virtually everyone.

Rangers wanted to hire Montgomery too, didnt they?

Let me get this straight. The Rangers wanted to hire Montgomery. He was fired due to inappropriate behavior. Ergo David Quinn has a very good chance of committing the same type of behavior.

Yeah, I retract my statement. Calling this outright stupidity is a gross insult to stupidity.

 

[True Blue]

Ohhh I see you are back! How lucky we all are-

I see you never left. How very lucky for the rest of us. Oh, wait. You DO have that silent majority in your corner, right?

ummmmm yeah I’d stand by my statement that the Rangers win games when their goaltenders play amazing. No one said “the only games they win..”

Wait, wait....this is your statement is it not?

Whenever the goalie plays unbelievable the Rangers win.

Whenever means every or any time. So when you state that every time the Rangers goalie plays unbelievable (i.e they steal games by standing on their heads), the Rangers win. Otherwise they loose. So yes, in fact you are stating the only games that they win. It is an if-then statement. If the goalie plays unbelievable, they win. If not, they loose. Or would you care to further sink your own statements?

Just curious, where were you when Quinn cost the team a point at worst by putting the 4th line out there with a minute to go in the Montreal game? Just curious

Ahh...this is what one refers to as a straw-man argument. Pretending to debate a point by debating a completely different point that no one is arguing. My response was to your statement that the only games that the Rangers win are the ones where their goalies stand on their heads. We were not discussing a particular game. You made a general statement. I rebutted the general statement.

If you want to discuss specific games, then we an discuss specific games. Otherwise throwing out generalities and making feeble attempts to paint the entirety with your bias seems a bit off, no?