Player Discussion David Quinn

[JHS]

You can't measure hard work. It can't be quantified to say that X player is giving Y effort. But you can certainly tell when someone is working hard and you can certainly tell when one player is giving a better effort than another. If a coach didn't hold players accountable for that, I wouldn't want him as a coach.

Gusev is getting scratched because of his play away from the puck. Ovechkin basically just called out the entire Leafs team for the same reason. It was a lesson that he took a long time to learn, himself. In hockey, and in the NHL in particular, winning is just as much about stopping the other team from scoring as it is scoring yourself.

I agree that I want coaches holding the players accountable for their effort-- no question about that. I totally agree but my only point is, holding guys accountable for things like "effort" can't be viewed through the eye test. Players need to know exactly what the coach wants of them( like where to be, when to execute a certain skill, when to take a risk, when to play safe.) I think its hard for a player to know what "just work harder" actually means. To me, the ideal coach is a coach that tells his players exactly what he wants and then holds them accountable for that. I think Quinn is not far off from this, he just needs to focus more on communicating the X's and O's clearer( maybe he is at practice and during the games-- I can't be sure.)

 

[True Blue]

I’d argue his entire approach to coaching is failing right now! Questioning effort, constant line juggling, planting fear of failure in the minds of his players— he just seems like a very negative guy and his team is not responding to it.

Poor effort should be questioned. Playing because you fear your time will be cut if you do not play the right way can produce a positive response. All of us work with in that type of environment. Your replacement is always out there.

The team responded last year and looks like they responded pretty well again.

NHL players need to know their coach has their back and Quinn is alienating himself from the team already( his latest “I don’t care what you do in the driveway”) speech is yet another example.

There is absolutely zero point zero evidence of that.

These guys are mostly early 20 somethings. They tune out this type of guy immediately and it’s pretty obvious right now, that they have tuned him out. I hope this dynamic changes, and again, I’m traditionally not a guy to get on the coach, but if something does not budge here this season is going to be brutal and probably a huge step back in the rebuild.

Let's bring AV back and sing cum ba ya.

I’m still floored that he was given this job. Barry Trotz could have been the coach right now if the Rangers waited a few months to hire their coach. He took the same type of job with the Islanders and look how much better that team is.

Trotz is a developmental coach? Quinn got the job because Gorton believes that he has a partner in executing his plan and vision. And sees the game the same way.

 

[McRanger]

Trotz is a developmental coach?

His first job was taking over an expansion Predators team and his third job was taking over a relatively young non-playoff Isles team.

He's known for teaching players defensive responsibility and hard work.

Assuming "development coach" is actually a thing, why would he not be a development coach? How is what he does substantially different from what Quinn does?

 

[True Blue]

Assuming "development coach" is actually a thing, why would he not be a development coach? How is what he does substantially different from what Quinn does?

This is just my view, but I believe that the view, at least from Gorton's perch, was that Quinn has experience in working with VERY young kids and developing them the right way.

This is my opinion as I am not Gorton. Trotz is a very good coach. But clearly, Gorton was looking for something specific.

 

[McRanger]

This is just my view, but I believe that the view, at least from Gorton's perch, was that Quinn has experience in working with VERY young kids and developing them the right way.

This is my opinion as I am not Gorton. Trotz is a very good coach. But clearly, Gorton was looking for something specific.

Quinn certainly has a lot of experience with youth coaching.

Expectations are certainly different, but I suppose I just don't see how their approaches vastly differ. Its hard to know exactly how Quinn (or Trotz) behave but Quinn doesn't come off as a particularly coddling individual.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

Quinn certainly has a lot of experience with youth coaching.

Expectations are certainly different, but I suppose I just don't see how their approaches vastly differ. Its hard to know exactly how Quinn (or Trotz) behave but Quinn doesn't come off as a particularly coddling individual.

There were reports of him taking Chytil and Howden out for breakfast every game day last season. I think he’s demanding in certain aspects of hockey, but he’s understands that some of these players are essentially children that are transitioning into adulthood

 

[McRanger]

There were reports of him taking Chytil and Howden out for breakfast every game day last season. I think he’s demanding in certain aspects of hockey, but he’s understands that some of these players are essentially children that are transitioning into adulthood

That is certainly a good example of (positive connotation) coddling.

I guess my counter would be if Trotz didn't do that with say David Legwand (or doesn't do it with Noah Dobson or Wahlstrom or whoever) and the end result is the same (well rounded young hockey players/individuals) is that type of behavior really necessary for a coach to be considered a development coach?

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

That is certainly a good example of (positive connotation) coddling.

I guess my counter would be if Trotz didn't do that with say David Legwand (or doesn't do it with Noah Dobson or Wahlstrom or whoever) and the end result is the same (well rounded young hockey players/individuals) is that type of behavior really necessary for a coach to be considered a development coach?

No, but I think there is a clear difference with what the front offices think their teams are that’s apparent in the timings of the hirings and the amount of kids on each team. Every coach is going to have to integrate and develop younger players at some point, it’s baked into having a salary cap. The big differences, to me, are that Trotz was hired right after he won a Stanley Cup by a team that was trying to show it’s pending UFA captain and superstar that they’re finally putting their best foot forward and trying to consistently get him into the playoffs and that going into the past two seasons they’ve gone into the seasons without big holes in the lineups for the kids to fill.

I think the most concise way of stating my point without writing an essay comparing and contrasting them is: while Trotz and Quinn may both have to develop players and win games, the primary focus and the consequences for failings in either part are weighted much different for both of them and in turn changes the approach that they have to take as coaches

 

[JHS]

No, but I think there is a clear difference with what the front offices think their teams are that’s apparent in the timings of the hirings and the amount of kids on each team. Every coach is going to have to integrate and develop younger players at some point, it’s baked into having a salary cap. The big differences, to me, are that Trotz was hired right after he won a Stanley Cup by a team that was trying to show it’s pending UFA captain and superstar that they’re finally putting their best foot forward and trying to consistently get him into the playoffs and that going into the past two seasons they’ve gone into the seasons without big holes in the lineups for the kids to fill.

I think the most concise way of stating my point without writing an essay comparing and contrasting them is: while Trotz and Quinn may both have to develop players and win games, the primary focus and the consequences for failings in either part are weighted much different for both of them and in turn changes the approach that they have to take as coaches

I really mean this- I’m enjoying this discussion because it’s just that- a civilized debate. I see your point on Quinn having more of a background dealing with you g players because he worked with them in college and that makes sense. I also agree that he fits the mold of a coach that works with youth and gets them( I see that in the way he is tough on them—it’s kind of fatherly in that he is looking after their best interests.). Here’s the issue I have though, Quinn hasn’t accomplished anything at the NHL level and I’d just much rather have a successful NHL coach/former player at the front of this rebuild because I believe those guys hold more credibility than any other type of coach. They have been through it and know what it takes to reach that certain level of play. I believe Trotz would have done amazingly well but I totally agree that the Rangers did not hire him because Gorton wanted someone he could consider his equal and Barry Trotz is way more successful than the GM is.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

I really mean this- I’m enjoying this discussion because it’s just that- a civilized debate. I see your point on Quinn having more of a background dealing with you g players because he worked with them in college and that makes sense. I also agree that he fits the mold of a coach that works with youth and gets them( I see that in the way he is tough on them—it’s kind of fatherly in that he is looking after their best interests.). Here’s the issue I have though, Quinn hasn’t accomplished anything at the NHL level and I’d just much rather have a successful NHL coach/former player at the front of this rebuild because I believe those guys hold more credibility than any other type of coach. They have been through it and know what it takes to reach that certain level of play. I believe Trotz would have done amazingly well but I totally agree that the Rangers did not hire him because Gorton wanted someone he could consider his equal and Barry Trotz is way more successful than the GM is.

I did not say this, and I certainly don't think it

 

[JHS]

I did not say this, and I certainly don't think it

Fair- did not mean to put words in your mouth. It was mentioned by someone in this thread though hence the reference.

 

[True Blue]

Here’s the issue I have though, Quinn hasn’t accomplished anything at the NHL level and I’d just much rather have a successful NHL coach/former player at the front of this rebuild because I believe those guys hold more credibility than any other type of coach. They have been through it and know what it takes to reach that certain level of play.

That would be true if this was a team that was a solid playoff contender or a Cup contender, but not a team that is still taking early steps of a complete rebuild with an extremely young team. The team has what, double digit amount of players that are as young as the roster of BU? These kids need exactly the type of coach that Quinn is as he is very much used to deal with such players, many of who still cannot buy a beer legally.

Such a process will also, at least in theory, allow Quinn to grow into being a true NHL coach as his approach will also evolve as the kids mature. But the basic building blocks that he instills, will last.

 

[KirkAlbuquerque]

absolute genius

 

[McRanger]

I don't doubt Quinn's credentials when it comes to youth coaching or that the Rangers targeted someone with that type of experience to be their coach during the rebuild.

I just don't know if matters much. I mean we're not exactly the first organization to ice a super young team. A "good coach" should be able to do the same things a "development coach" does, because most coaches who fall into the former category were in a position, at one time or another, that put them in the latter category. Including Trotz. Or Quenneville. Or Torts. Or pretty much any guy you'd find on the Jack Adams trophy.

Hopefully Quinn is a guy who can continue to connect with and improve everyone's game. Because players continue to evolve way way way beyond the "they're practically children!" phase of their careers. Which is why most teams target the best option and not the one that fits a small handful of players.

 

[JHS]

I don't doubt Quinn's credentials when it comes to youth coaching or that the Rangers targeted someone with that type of experience to be their coach during the rebuild.

I just don't know if matters much. I mean we're not exactly the first organization to ice a super young team. A "good coach" should be able to do the same things a "development coach" does, because most coaches who fall into the former category were in a position, at one time or another, that put them in the latter category. Including Trotz. Or Quenneville. Or Torts. Or pretty much any guy you'd find on the Jack Adams trophy.

Hopefully Quinn is a guy who can continue to connect with and improve everyone's game. Because players continue to evolve way way way beyond the "they're practically children!" phase of their careers. Which is why most teams target the best option and not the one that fits a small handful of players.

Yeah this is my point. Any coach can develop players and all these more experienced guys have actually just elevated in stature so they no longer need to take these lower end NHL coaching jobs with teams undergoing rebuilds. What these experienced guys bring is the added factor of credibility and experience at this level which only adds to the development of players. Essentially by hiring and college coach the Rangers were banking on quinn relating to the players more but honestly he’s not here to be their friends, he’s not here to be their Dad’s, he’s here to show them how to win hockey games and establish a structure so they can succeed. I want a guy in that responsibility who knows the system needed to win a cup and knows the demands that can be made to get players into that position. Quinn is guessing at that— he’s never done it at this level. Honestly, Quinn would be a perfect assistant coach because he could just be the players go to for emotional support but the head coach needs to know what is best for his players and I don’t know how Quinn can know that.

Now if we are talking “right fit” in terms of personality than we are all kind of guessing at that since none of us are in the room or at practice. I think Quinn’s act would get old with me real fast but that’s me— other guys might enjoy the style he seems to have.

 

[True Blue]

Any coach can develop players and all these more experienced guys have actually just elevated in stature so they no longer need to take these lower end NHL coaching jobs with teams undergoing rebuilds. What these experienced guys bring is the added factor of credibility and experience at this level which only adds to the development of players.

But that credibility would be much more applicable to a perennial playoff contender or a Cup contender with a good amount of vets. Not so much with a team that is extremely young and are not old enough to go to a bar and get a drink. Or so young that they are very new to North America, not just the NHL.

And not "any "coach can develop players. There are some that are just meant for veteran teams and some that can work well with a bunch of 25 year olds, but not really with sub 22 year olds.

Essentially by hiring and college coach the Rangers were banking on quinn relating to the players more but honestly he’s not here to be their friends, he’s not here to be their Dad’s, he’s here to show them how to win hockey games and establish a structure so they can succeed.

No, he is not here to be there friend, but he has experience of essentially helping kids become young men. And that is a not a small thing with this team, given how young they are.

I want a guy in that responsibility who knows the system needed to win a cup and knows the demands that can be made to get players into that position.

There is no such system. Systems change. It is players who tend to make a great system. And it requires that players buy into what the coach is demanding.

Quinn is guessing at that— he’s never done it at this level.

Every first time coach has not done it at this level. Until they do.

Honestly, Quinn would be a perfect assistant coach because he could just be the players go to for emotional support but the head coach needs to know what is best for his players and I don’t know how Quinn can know that.

The players seem to be responding to him. That is all that matters.

Honestly, what is another coach going to do with this team? Quinn seems to be pressing the right buttons with his players. Are they going to be uneven throughout the year? Of course they are. But that because they are learning. You could stick Scotty Bowman behind the bench, and I doubt the results are any different.

 

[Tawnos]

I don't doubt Quinn's credentials when it comes to youth coaching or that the Rangers targeted someone with that type of experience to be their coach during the rebuild.

I just don't know if matters much. I mean we're not exactly the first organization to ice a super young team. A "good coach" should be able to do the same things a "development coach" does, because most coaches who fall into the former category were in a position, at one time or another, that put them in the latter category. Including Trotz. Or Quenneville. Or Torts. Or pretty much any guy you'd find on the Jack Adams trophy.

Hopefully Quinn is a guy who can continue to connect with and improve everyone's game. Because players continue to evolve way way way beyond the "they're practically children!" phase of their careers. Which is why most teams target the best option and not the one that fits a small handful of players.

Joel Quenneville is a really good example of the absolute wrong person for a rebuilding team. That was proven that pretty quickly this time around in Chicago. And guess what? He's never been at the helm of a rebuild. St Louis was good when he got there, or they were supposed to be but they had turned on Keenan. Colorado was good when he got there and didn't have a single important player under the age of 23. Chicago was exiting a rebuild when he got there and he helped them take the next step. Yes, the 08-09 Blackhawks were a young team too, but there were at least a year, probably 2 years further along when Quenneville got there.

Yes, young players developed into NHL players under his coaching, but never a bunch all at once. Not every coach has the right temperament and, and possibly some don't have the right motivation to work with youth like this.

Besides which, coaches who have reached the point where they've won a Jack Adams get opportunities to coach good teams that have a shot at the Cup. You aren't getting a coach like that to run a rebuild.

 

[Hi ImHFNYR]

The narrative that Quinn is ruining our younger players was always pretty dumb and mainly rooted in reactionary posts to short-term failures. .

This wins.

I dont even want to dismiss the possibility that hes doing a bad job. Still, based on what we've seen from a team so extraordinarily young? It gives us zero indication that hes doing a bad job. For some unknown reason people are trying to make wins and losses the ultimate measure when it's at least 1 season too early to do so.

 

[McRanger]

Joel Quenneville is a really good example of the absolute wrong person for a rebuilding team. That was proven that pretty quickly this time around in Chicago. And guess what? He's never been at the helm of a rebuild. St Louis was good when he got there, or they were supposed to be but they had turned on Keenan. Colorado was good when he got there and didn't have a single important player under the age of 23. Chicago was exiting a rebuild when he got there and he helped them take the next step. Yes, the 08-09 Blackhawks were a young team too, but there were at least a year, probably 2 years further along when Quenneville got there.

Yes, young players developed into NHL players under his coaching, but never a bunch all at once. Not every coach has the right temperament and, and possibly some don't have the right motivation to work with youth like this.

Besides which, coaches who have reached the point where they've won a Jack Adams get opportunities to coach good teams that have a shot at the Cup. You aren't getting a coach like that to run a rebuild.

When Quenneville was hired the Blackhawks had been out of the playoffs for years, hadn't won a playoff round since the mid-90s and their two cornerstone forwards were 19 and 20 years old. Expectations outside of "continuing to improve" were nonexistent. If that is not the definition of a team that is still rebuilding than we might as well just stop using the expression altogether.

And the only thing proven by his firing was that after a decade even the best coaches time out. I'm pretty sure they didn't look at Alex Debrincat breaking out as a 20 year and Nick Schmaltz breaking out at 21 and say "Quenneville clearly can't work with young players". There were so many players, from the greenest of rookies to the most seasoned of veterans, that improved under JQ that its absurd that I even need to type this sentence.

As for the bold that is extremely debatable. Coaches like winning but they also like money. Or challenges. Why did Trotz take the Isles job? He looked at a young non-playoff team about to lose their franchise star to Toronto and concluded that the f**king Islanders were his best chance to win another cup?

As I have said, repeatedly, a good coach should be able do what a development coach can do. The idea that teams with young players should avoid good coaches to hire development coaches is idiotic on every level. And that is assuming that "development coach" is even a thing which it probably isn't. You know who probably agrees with that assessment even if he would never say so? David Quinn. I'm sure he bristles at the concept that he is just some guy brought into the organization to coddle teenagers and keep the seat warm until we hire a good coach to "take the next step" and that he will spend his career bouncing around cleaning up other peoples messes until he ends up back in college. I'm sure he believes his mandate is to help everyone on the team improves and sees himself coaching the Rangers when there isn't a player with acne left on the roster.

So. Again. The hope is that Quinn is our "good coach". And despite disagreeing with some of his moves I have yet to see anything that has convinced me he can't or won't be. And that is a good thing too, because the amount of time until our youth is acclimated to the NHL and management wants us to compete will be here in about 10 minutes. So for his sake and our sake, I hope he's the guy.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

Coaches are hired to eventually be fired. I don’t care if Quinn isn’t the right coach for the ‘being good’ phase of this, I care that he’s the right coach for right now

 

[The S5]

Yeah this is my point. Any coach can develop players and all these more experienced guys have actually just elevated in stature so they no longer need to take these lower end NHL coaching jobs with teams undergoing rebuilds. What these experienced guys bring is the added factor of credibility and experience at this level which only adds to the development of players. Essentially by hiring and college coach the Rangers were banking on quinn relating to the players more but honestly he’s not here to be their friends, he’s not here to be their Dad’s, he’s here to show them how to win hockey games and establish a structure so they can succeed. I want a guy in that responsibility who knows the system needed to win a cup and knows the demands that can be made to get players into that position. Quinn is guessing at that— he’s never done it at this level. Honestly, Quinn would be a perfect assistant coach because he could just be the players go to for emotional support but the head coach needs to know what is best for his players and I don’t know how Quinn can know that.

Now if we are talking “right fit” in terms of personality than we are all kind of guessing at that since none of us are in the room or at practice. I think Quinn’s act would get old with me real fast but that’s me— other guys might enjoy the style he seems to have.

If there were a specific structure/formula needed to win a Cup, wouldn't EVERYBODY be doing it?

Torts was known as a guy who would wear on people pretty quickly. Keenan was an asshole. Lots of players can't stand Babcock. Either way, most coaches have a shelf life. They all relate to players in different ways.
Ask yourself, what type of coach would you like to play for? Is it the guy who genuinely cares about you personally, but still holds you accountable or the guy who screws with your head and holds your job/playing time over your head as a means of motivation? I think most coaches today fall into the earlier category. Same can't be said for the old days.
I still contend that most systems you see in the NHL are done by every other team. Its the players who make the system work.
Who coached the Cup winner last season? Experience coaching?
Pens had a first time head coach in Sullivan and Bylsma.
Plenty of other examples.
My point is its just too early to judge Quinn. Plenty on this board like to rant and rave about poor coaching and terrible players as a scapegoat for a team not being very good, or just not ready.

 

[True Blue]

This wins.

I dont even want to dismiss the possibility that hes doing a bad job. Still, based on what we've seen from a team so extraordinarily young? It gives us zero indication that hes doing a bad job. For some unknown reason people are trying to make wins and losses the ultimate measure when it's at least 1 season too early to do so.

That or I go back to finding a reason as to why their pie in the sky expectations are not coming through. Or that a prospect is playing, but not the prospect that they want.

 

[McRanger]

Coaches are hired to eventually be fired. I don’t care if Quinn isn’t the right coach for the ‘being good’ phase of this, I care that he’s the right coach for right now

I cant argue with any of that.

But being that the organization expects the "being good" part to be here ASAP it would be pretty inconvenient for both us and David Quinn if he weren't the right coach.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

I cant argue with any of that.

But being that the organization expects the "being good" part to be here ASAP it would be pretty inconvenient for both us and David Quinn if he weren't the right coach.

But ASAP doesn’t necessarily even mean next year if they’re being real with themselves

 

[McRanger]

But ASAP doesn’t necessarily even mean next year if they’re being real with themselves

Compete for the cup? No. Compete for the playoffs? Hard to know for sure but I would think the organization probably expects us to do that by next year.

And I also think by next year the organization would definitely expect most of our young players to have established themselves as NHLers. These youngsters are very quickly transitioning from "just drafted kids" to the age where a lot of our young players in the past have established themselves.