Player Discussion David Quinn: Part V

[chosen]

And am I to accept that experience is not directly connected to coaching ability?

Absolutely.

Take a look around the NHL. It's mostly a churning of previously fired coaches, some of whom are considered total morons by a majority of posters here.

I'm of the belief there is little difference between coaches, minus a few exceptions, like Trotz.

Are you also aware that NHL coaching tenures are by far the lowest of the 4 major sports in America? I believe the average tenure is 3 seasons. If experience was worth something as a determining factor of coaching ability, that wouldn't be the case.

 

[chosen]

But if they won this game and lost to Isles in the upcoming won would’ve you given Quinn credit for winning a big one? I suspect not.

Suspect?

Is there any doubt?

 

[NYSPORTS]

Absolutely.

Take a look around the NHL. It's mostly a churning of previously fired coaches, some of whom are considered total morons by a majority of posters here.

I'm of the belief there is little difference between coaches, minus a few exceptions, like Trotz.
.

i think Torts is in that category yet he’s more volatile.

 

[kovazub94]

Because my expectations aren't SC. THAT would be unrealistic. Somehow this strawman of an argument keeps getting repeated.

My expectations prior to the season for the Rangers were them battling for the playoff spot unless... This “unless” exceeded any reasonable guesses by far and still Quinn managed to be in this battle for far longer. A few posters here noted that under circumstances it could be put forth that Quinn’s Rangers exceeded expectations. You’re so set in your hatred for Quinn that factors far exceeding the impact of Quinn’s coaching don’t matter to you.
I hope you evaluate your own successes and failures in the same manner.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

My expectations prior to the season for the Rangers were them battling for the playoff spot unless... This “unless” exceeded any reasonable guesses by far and still Quinn managed to be in this battle for far longer. A few posters here noted that under circumstances it could be put forth that Quinn’s Rangers exceeded expectations. You’re so set in your hatred for Quinn that factors far exceeding the impact of Quinn’s coaching don’t matter to you.
I hope you evaluate your own successes and failures in the same manner.

I'm not making millions of dollars and if I stopped performing I'd get fired. The Rangers aren't really battling for a playoff spot, they had probably a 10% shot before this last stinker.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Absolutely.

Take a look around the NHL. It's mostly a churning of previously fired coaches, some of whom are considered total morons by a majority of posters here.

I'm of the belief there is little difference between coaches, minus a few exceptions, like Trotz.

Are you also aware that NHL coaching tenures are by far the lowest of the 4 major sports in America? I believe the average tenure is 3 seasons. If experience was worth something as a determining factor of coaching ability, that wouldn't be the case.

I agree with every word of this. The game of hockey, above all other sports IMO, is based in emotion, effort, and momentum. Far too often, people look at an NHL coach in the same vein as an NFL coach, spewing ambiguous platitudes about structures and game plans. Incidentally, that limited argument boils down to losing = bad game plan, winning = good game plan.

The coaching carousel you mention is a symptom of motivation being such an important component of the game of hockey. I dont want to totally discount having a sound structure and game plan, but in a game as chaotic as hockey, it's more important to have a coach at the helm that the players trust and will play their asses off for.

 

[smoneil]

There are only 6 defensemen as opposed to 12 forwards. So it is far, far easier to get time to one set than the other.

Irrelevant. We've seen coaches give defensemen 8-10 minutes per night before (and play with 7 D before). The defense equivalent of what Quinn has done with the kid forwards would be playing Trouba 30 minutes per game, Smith, Johnson, and Bitetto 20 minutes a game while giving Fox, Lindgren, and Miller 8-10 with no PP time. Miller in particular has had growing pains (at least, relative to Fox and Lindgren), but he's allowed to play through them. He's gotten more opportunity on the PP even when his game is struggling. Yeah, part of that is necessity because the team didn't really have any top 4 options outside of Lindgren on LD, but can't the same be said about that RW spot on Panarin's line?

I guess the real test, if Quinn is still here next season when the 3rd pair will be up and coming young guys rather than guys on their way out of the league, is how much leash/opportunity he gives to guys like Lundkvist and co.

 

[True Blue]

Irrelevant. We've seen coaches give defensemen 8-10 minutes per night before (and play with 7 D before). The defense equivalent of what Quinn has done with the kid forwards would be playing Trouba 30 minutes per game, Smith, Johnson, and Bitetto 20 minutes a game while giving Fox, Lindgren, and Miller 8-10 with no PP time. Miller in particular has had growing pains (at least, relative to Fox and Lindgren), but he's allowed to play through them. He's gotten more opportunity on the PP even when his game is struggling. Yeah, part of that is necessity because the team didn't really have any top 4 options outside of Lindgren on LD, but can't the same be said about that RW spot on Panarin's line?

I guess the real test, if Quinn is still here next season when the 3rd pair will be up and coming young guys rather than guys on their way out of the league, is how much leash/opportunity he gives to guys like Lundkvist and co.

X amount of time for X amount of forwards. Z amount of time for Z amount of defenseman. Hardly irrelevant. One can hide forwards much easier among 12 players as opposed to 6.

 

[CLW]

Irrelevant. We've seen coaches give defensemen 8-10 minutes per night before (and play with 7 D before). The defense equivalent of what Quinn has done with the kid forwards would be playing Trouba 30 minutes per game, Smith, Johnson, and Bitetto 20 minutes a game while giving Fox, Lindgren, and Miller 8-10 with no PP time. Miller in particular has had growing pains (at least, relative to Fox and Lindgren), but he's allowed to play through them. He's gotten more opportunity on the PP even when his game is struggling. Yeah, part of that is necessity because the team didn't really have any top 4 options outside of Lindgren on LD, but can't the same be said about that RW spot on Panarin's line?

I guess the real test, if Quinn is still here next season when the 3rd pair will be up and coming young guys rather than guys on their way out of the league, is how much leash/opportunity he gives to guys like Lundkvist and co.

The Rangers are supposedly going with an all rookie 3rd pairing next season. I doubt that will happen, but if if does will Quinn feel the need to give too many minutes to Fox & Company then and shelter the 3rd pair, especially in games where they struggle?

I mean, if Quinn publicly says Kakko has to play more like Fast if put on Panarin and Strome's wing, is it any surprise the player(s) go "Eh, maybe not?" internally? That's just Quinn jamming square pegs in round holes. Kakko is a power forward IN TRAINING, and he has extra dimensions to his game Fast never will have. It's things like this that makes me see Quinn as tone deaf as a coach.

The players are not stupid, they've won championships and been training since they were kids. If Quinn's vision and the players' idea of what good hockey is is fundamentally apart what's the point? I get that not all of them should try to emulate Panarin, but there is no better player in the league to stretch the ice East-West and use every inch of the ice to the advantage offensively. If Quinn's vision of wingers is Fast, then I don't think he is the right coach for Laf and Kakko etc.

This is like putting a 60's big band swing leader in charge of the NY Philharmonic Orchestra. "I want more Oompa-Oompa from the brass section". /facepalm

 

[smoneil]

X amount of time for X amount of forwards. Z amount of time for Z amount of defenseman. Hardly irrelevant. One can hide forwards much easier among 12 players as opposed to 6.

It's still irrelevant to the point that I was making. The young players showing the most development are the defensemen. Those players have been getting regular opportunities and minutes on the power play. That has been true since Quinn got here. I give him credit for it, and think it shows the merit of what a lot of us have been asking for for the kid forwards.

 

[Ola]

This is a great insight. And it does feel more apparent in DQ's comments that there is a big disconnect between his vision and how the players play. Not just the veterans, but as you've pointed out elsewhere, with the kids as well.

From the NY Post yesterday, speaking about Zac Jones.

“You want him to enjoy the moment, and obviously he’s going to be a little bit nervous, like most guys are when they start their NHL career,” Quinn said. “But I think once the game gets going a lot of guys’ nerves disappear. He needs to play to his strengths, just like every player does when they get to this level.

“They can’t change the way they play, can’t be afraid of making mistakes, and if they do make a mistake, they have to shake it off and move forward. That’s what pros do. So, first thing is, just enjoy it. Enjoy the moment. He’s worked very hard.”

I do believe Quinn means this, especially for a defensemen like Jones. Fox, Miller, Lindgren, even DeAngelo have all been allowed and encouraged to play to their strengths and the results have followed quickly. But what about Kakko and Lafreniere? Has this really been what we've seen with them? Encouragement to play to their strengths, support and allowance to make mistakes and learn from them? The only standards I can discern for the young forwards is wait your turn.

I like those quotes from Quinn and couldn't agree more on the approch we should have in regards to Jones.

The problem I honestly think exists with Quinn in relation to the forwards is that he is just incompetent when it comes to coaching them. Everyone can see that what we do isn't enough, but many players do not think Quinn's solutions will make us better. They don't listen to him.

When he says:
“We just weren’t playing the way we needed to if we were going to have a chance, I thought we were too high risk, too east-west, and weren’t playing fast enough. ...When we score goals [as against the Devils], we tend to play the way we played tonight and sometimes get carried away with it,” Quinn said. “Against a team like this, in games like this of this magnitude, that stuff doesn’t work shift in and shift out and expect to succeed. We learned the hard way.”

It is because he is frustrated with his players not listened.

I don't for second think that a single player disagrees with Quinn on the above, he lists a bunch of shortcomings that are super obvious. But it is also very obvious that many players do not believe in the specific solution DQ preaches. He doesn't have a solution. He doesn't understand what it takes. When the players buys into what he wants, the result is even worse.

To the players, he is the guy who -- when you are really frustrating having struggled hard with something -- that chips in with some advice making it sound like there is an easy solution but its just obvious that he don't understand it. The first time you might go, eh no you cannot "just" do this or that. But after a while you turn a def ear to this person.

 

[Ola]

The NHL is about 31 teams, over 600 players, working year in and year out together devoting their lives into becoming as hard to beat hockey teams as it is possible to become. In fact, we are at a very very early stage at a team. We couldn't remotely be "there" in all areas. Like what 90% of the roster hasn't been here two full seasons.

What is DQ always complaining about?
-Mental aspects.
-We aren't prepared.
-We don't work hard enough.
-We don't have the right mindset.
-We try to do too much.
-We try to play too complicated.
-We must play an easier N-S style putting pucks on nets and not taking risks.

As a player, if they made sure to give 200% and play a simplified more N-S style against a team like the Islanders, what would the results be? Honestly, we could have gone like 2-6 on the season almost at best. Or? Does anyone agree with that estimate? 3-5?

We are at stage 2 or 3 of 10 maybe on our journey to becoming a true contender. To reaching this team's full potential. We need to get from say "3" to "10" as a team. We can improve tremendously in so many areas, where is the focus on that??? Quinn is taking short cuts because he don't know what 10 is, he doesn't know what is beyond 3. I.e. he is incompetent.

 

[CLW]

It's still irrelevant to the point that I was making. The young players showing the most development are the defensemen. Those players have been getting regular opportunities and minutes on the power play. That has been true since Quinn got here. I give him credit for it, and think it shows the merit of what a lot of us have been asking for for the kid forwards.

If you are talking to me (you didn't quote), I don't see the Rangers going with two very young rookies on the 3rd pair. It will probably be a veteran/rookie setup. As you said, maybe they will go with 7 D and Quinn sits the rookie that struggles the most. I agree Quinn seems to do better with defensemen, but d tend to get more playtime anyway since you rotate 3 pairs and not 4 lines and some d are decidedly not suitable for PP play.

 

[smoneil]

If you are talking to me (you didn't quote), I don't see the Rangers going with two very young rookies on the 3rd pair. It will probably be a veteran/rookie setup. As you said, maybe they will go with 7 D and Quinn sits the rookie that struggles the most. I agree Quinn seems to do better with defensemen, but d tend to get more playtime anyway since you rotate 3 pairs and not 4 lines and some d are decidedly not suitable for PP play.

I quoted. I assume I quoted someone who you blocked or who has blocked you (True Blue). As to your comment about a rookie pairing, I tend to agree. Depending on who we lose in the expansion draft (my money is currently on either Hajek or Gauthier), I could see them bringing back Smith for a one year deal. He can play both sides, and whether it's Jones or Lundkvist who looks better in camp, that guy would pair with Smith while the other gets top pair in Hartford. If both acclimate as quickly as Miller did, Smith could still be useful (at league minimum or thereabouts) as a utility player.

 

[Ola]

On top of being incompetent, Quinn has another big issue and that is probably what really have made me sour on him.

It is so super obvious that he is formed in an environment where he have had -- a tremendous position of power -- over his players and that is not something that he have been able to coupe with without develop some rather unpleasant habits. Almost every single player walking through his door at the college level, or his mentor Jack Parker's door before him, have solely placed the faith of their hockey careers in his/their hands. Winning the respect of his players have never ever been an issue, because nobody (very very few) had any alternatives other than winning the appreciation of their Coach with big C.

If you are a young player who is made a healthy scratch at a point of your career where its not expected, and you hear the coach preach to everyone and anyone who is willing to listen that the reason you are scratched is because "We have a minimum standard on the ice that is non-negotiatble, "x" haven't been able to live up to that standard which is the reason for why he is a healthy scratch" -- how will that make you feel? Why is DQ saying stuff like that? DQ is always saying stuff that makes it sounds like he is doing the right thing, but he is doing it at the expense of his players.

I reacted on this from Day 1 with him. But then he held everyone to the same standard, even some untouchable vets, and I felt like, 'you know what, it can be a good approch, be super honest and clear and enforce everyhing equally, you can push the group further and single players won't feel hanged out'.

But at least late last season and this season, almost every interview he is giving is about pushing away responsibility -- from himself -- onto the players making every single short coming of this team about "the players just not getting it", not wanting it enough or whatever. In fact, he is responsible for building a team and there is a ton of work undone and no progress whatsoever on a "team" level. This doesn't mean that the players all should get zero "blame". But I can guarantee you that it doesn't give you a roster of players with a lot of loyalty to their coach. There is one guy who never is held accountable by Dave Quinn and that is Dave Quinn.

 

[Ola]

A classic coaching strategy when too much pressure is starting to mount on a team is when a coach creates a controversy -- about himself -- to take pressure from the team. Why? It just works. A team is struggling, certain players aren't scoring, they are second guessed, a game is lost and everyone knows that you got X days of scrutiny coming up in the press of certain players that are struggling with confidence or whatever. And all of a sudden the coach throws some kind of tantrum at the PC and all news coverege turns to him for a few days instead of his players.

Can anyone imagine Dave Quinn doing something like that? Giving up some credibiltiy in the eyes of media to protect his players?

Can anyone in fact recall one single occasion where Dave Quinn have protected a player in a tough spot in the media?

 

[Ola]

Ultimately we are a team with the work cut out for it, but a guy in charge that just do not have sufficient knowledge of how to build what must be built.

 

[kovazub94]

On top of being incompetent, Quinn has another big issue and that is probably what really have made me sour on him.

It is so super obvious that he is formed in an environment where he have had -- a tremendous position of power -- over his players and that is not something that he have been able to coupe with without develop some rather unpleasant habits. Almost every single player walking through his door at the college level, or his mentor Jack Parker's door before him, have solely placed the faith of their hockey careers in his/their hands. Winning the respect of his players have never ever been an issue, because nobody (very very few) had any alternatives other than winning the appreciation of their Coach with big C.

If you are a young player who is made a healthy scratch at a point of your career where its not expected, and you hear the coach preach to everyone and anyone who is willing to listen that the reason you are scratched is because "We have a minimum standard on the ice that is non-negotiatble, "x" haven't been able to live up to that standard which is the reason for why he is a healthy scratch" -- how will that make you feel? Why is DQ saying stuff like that? DQ is always saying stuff that makes it sounds like he is doing the right thing, but he is doing it at the expense of his players.

I reacted on this from Day 1 with him. But then he held everyone to the same standard, even some untouchable vets, and I felt like, 'you know what, it can be a good approch, be super honest and clear and enforce everyhing equally, you can push the group further and single players won't feel hanged out'.

But at least late last season and this season, almost every interview he is giving is about pushing away responsibility -- from himself -- onto the players making every single short coming of this team about "the players just not getting it", not wanting it enough or whatever. In fact, he is responsible for building a team and there is a ton of work undone and no progress whatsoever on a "team" level. This doesn't mean that the players all should get zero "blame". But I can guarantee you that it doesn't give you a roster of players with a lot of loyalty to their coach. There is one guy who never is held accountable by Dave Quinn and that is Dave Quinn.

What the f*** are you talking about? Read your own post above, will you!

Its “we” in every sentence. Unlike AV who pointed fingers directly at players and away from himself, I don’t recall Quinn ever separating himself from the players.

Otherwise the posts above is repetitive to exactly the same post you made yesterday. Quinn had been worried of the the way the Rangers played even in wins against the Devils and that this style of play wouldn’t work against better playoff bound teams. The Rangers had played down to Devils level, and as a young team were unable to up the ante when facing Isles. Trouba’s injury was a HUGE contributor as well, as we know that he’s de facto team’s captain and vocal leader.

Can the Rangers play the right way? You betcha. They played this way earlier against the same Isles and against Caps and certain games against Pens and Bears, but the roster has to become more mature and experienced to be able to bring it up each game or adjust during the game.

These takes are about your impatience rather than Quinn’s coaching.

 

[True Blue]

Why is DQ saying stuff like that? DQ is always saying stuff that makes it sounds like he is doing the right thing, but he is doing it at the expense of his players.

If you are a young player and you find out that you are scratched because your coach does not feel like you are capable of handling the pressure of playing in high octane games each night, how do you think that makes you feel?

 

[TheDirtyH]

What the f*** are you talking about? Read your own post above, will you!

Its “we” in every sentence. Unlike AV who pointed fingers directly at players and away from himself, I don’t recall Quinn ever separating himself from the players.

Otherwise the posts above is repetitive to exactly the same post you made yesterday. Quinn had been worried of the the way the Rangers played even in wins against the Devils and that this style of play wouldn’t work against better playoff bound teams. The Rangers had played down to Devils level, and as a young team were unable to up the ante when facing Isles. Trouba’s injury was a HUGE contributor as well, as we know that he’s de facto team’s captain and vocal leader.

Can the Rangers play the right way? You betcha. They played this way earlier against the same Isles and against Caps and certain games against Pens and Bears, but the roster has to become more mature and experienced to be able to bring it up each game or adjust during the game.

These takes are about your impatience rather than Quinn’s coaching.

We're not reading @Ola's post with much attention and we need to improve in that area.

Alain liked first person plural too, btw.

 

[True Blue]

These takes are about your impatience rather than Quinn’s coaching.

The real problem here is that Gorton didn’t feel that Ola was up to snuff as the next Rangers coach.

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

What the f*** are you talking about? Read your own post above, will you!

Its “we” in every sentence. Unlike AV who pointed fingers directly at players and away from himself, I don’t recall Quinn ever separating himself from the players.

Otherwise the posts above is repetitive to exactly the same post you made yesterday. Quinn had been worried of the the way the Rangers played even in wins against the Devils and that this style of play wouldn’t work against better playoff bound teams. The Rangers had played down to Devils level, and as a young team were unable to up the ante when facing Isles. Trouba’s injury was a HUGE contributor as well, as we know that he’s de facto team’s captain and vocal leader.

Can the Rangers play the right way? You betcha. They played this way earlier against the same Isles and against Caps and certain games against Pens and Bears, but the roster has to become more mature and experienced to be able to bring it up each game or adjust during the game.

These takes are about your impatience rather than Quinn’s coaching.

Conjecture is some people’s reality.

 

[True Blue]

Conjecture is some people’s reality.

Much like mother, they just know best. How some are not at the NHL level remains a rather large mystery

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

The real problem here is that Gorton didn’t feel that Ola was up to snuff as the next Rangers coach.

Ergo Ola has a communication problem and he’s lost the board.

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

Much like mother, they just know best. How some are not at the NHL level remains a rather large mystery

And it’s the kids who suffer....