Player Discussion David Quinn

[eco's bones]

I think Quinn loses his job when progress stalls. Right now his main job is to turn prospects into established players and we have waves of prospects on the horizon for at least the next 4 years if not beyond. A couple/three years from now his job will be more conditioned on where the team is as far as contending than the availability of a Trotz, Laviolette or Quenneville. You don't fire your coach if he's getting you to where you want to go.

As far as now we're seeing younger players having impact--DeAngelo, Fox, Georgiev--others are doing pretty well--Chytil, Hajek, Howden--Kakko after a slow start is looking better. Lindgren is doing alright. I'd like to see more out of Andersson and Lemieux. So IMO Quinn has been doing a good job.

 

[Hi ImHFNYR]

I see less and less posts in each new thread. LOL.

Same here. It's just so I can be less of a jerk...which I'm still a jerk...I just dont have as many opportunities to lose myself in jerkdom at someone who is consistently frustrating

But it's funny how many times I'll see someone yelling in frustration with no quote there and all i can think is "lol I made the right choice"

We couldn't compete with the veteran team we had. Some of them were going to be free agents anyway. We had no farm to speak of--hadn't had a first in years. If we did there would have been a middle road maybe but since there wasn't a middle road we had two choices really.....either 1) continue with the team we had or 2) dump the vets and reinvent the team with younger guys, prospects and draft picks. The second option was obviously best but it comes with all kinds of growing pains. Personally I don't think you would have been happy whatever they decided to do. I get the sense that no matter what you like to ***** and complain and I guess that's your right but it is tiresome.

Case in point, I've got no clue who this is for lol

 

[hella rights]

The Rangers went to the Cup finals in 13-14. It would have been ludicrous to tear the team apart at that point. Still because of cap issues for the next few years we would lose a player or two every summer because we couldn't afford to keep them. The Rangers were at least a semi-serious contender through 15-16 and during that period of time and also in 16-17 we would trade away draft picks to enhance our playoff chances. None of that was rocket science. Practically every good team makes deals at the deadline to enhance their chances. Pittsburgh does it. The Caps and Bruins do it. The Blackhawks would do it when they were good. The Sharks do it---so does Vegas.

What it did though was deplete our pipeline--meanwhile our players were aging out and the window closing and the Rangers braintrust saw no real light ahead anymore---took a step back and closed the window themselves. In retrospect that was a very smart thing to do. Most teams don't do that and when they inevitably decline don't fall to the bottom of the well but kind of gradually move into mediocrity and sometimes for a long while. The Rangers thing here was to go from good to terrible in one step but in trading off assets to do that they injected a ****load of quality prospects into their pipeline. It hurt--but if you've been a lifelong Rangers fan you should be use to hurt---and it comes with a **** ton of growing pains and it also calls for a bit of patience to build bodies from teens to adults, to build chemistry among these younger guys, to sort out who to keep and who to move along for other assets. It's a process--you're either up for it or not.

Most people here including yourself understand all this--there are some though who seem almost deliberately obtuse. They're going to moan the whole way through the process. It's what it is and for those who can't take it maybe they should leave.

To be fair though, reasonable people can also disagree on whether they think the process the team has adopted is working. Like you say, fans should be ready to accept a period of mediocrity with such a young team, but we also want evidence the process is better than, say, Edmonton’s, so what are the signs we’re moving in the right direction? Not a simple question given the rebuild has many interrelated parts (e.g., drafting, prospect development, coaching staff, asset management, salary cap) and is still in the early stages.

One area where I’m hoping to see improvement is how the team responds to adversity like falling behind to a good team (Boston), facing a team that gets under their skin (Ottawa), or getting questionable officiating. If they don’t look to be getting more resilient and continue to fall apart in these situations, I’m worried that no matter how well other aspects of the process may be working, the team will continue to be fragile. How disappointing would it be to have all the talent in the world but not be able to deliver when things get tough *cough* Tampa Bay *cough*?

 

[NYR]

I think Quinn loses his job when progress stalls. Right now his main job is to turn prospects into established players and we have waves of prospects on the horizon for at least the next 4 years if not beyond. A couple/three years from now his job will be more conditioned on where the team is as far as contending than the availability of a Trotz, Laviolette or Quenneville. You don't fire your coach if he's getting you to where you want to go.

As far as now we're seeing younger players having impact--DeAngelo, Fox, Georgiev--others are doing pretty well--Chytil, Hajek, Howden--Kakko after a slow start is looking better. Lindgren is doing alright. I'd like to see more out of Andersson and Lemieux. So IMO Quinn has been doing a good job.

I'm gonna refrain from arguing back and forth with certain people from here on out since it's a waste of my finger texting energy.
That said.. Hopefully I can point something out without causing mass hysteria from fragile people lol.
If we exclude Kakko because he's fresh off the boat from Finland, 6 out of the 9 players you mentioned have been developed from different organizations.

What part has Quinn played in any of that?

 

[JC704]

My patience is wearing thin with him. He should get until the holiday break, but I really don't like what I'm seeing.

 

[NYR]

Embarrassment (and AGING) of an original 6 team w one cup in 80 years... maybe try a different path? Not sure what u expected or wanted? Dolan and Sather to buy a team?

So you're saying that teams require a complete rebuild, ship everyone out and start anew whenever they can't get over that final hump?

I'll agree to disagree.

Players should've been replaced as needed IMO.
There's no reason why you can't bring in young talent on the fly.

Look at what we have now and I love the team, the young players and all but this is just not the place for development.

The NHL is for the finished product.

 

[NYR]

To be fair though, reasonable people can also disagree on whether they think the process the team has adopted is working. Like you say, fans should be ready to accept a period of mediocrity with such a young team, but we also want evidence the process is better than, say, Edmonton’s, so what are the signs we’re moving in the right direction? Not a simple question given the rebuild has many interrelated parts (e.g., drafting, prospect development, coaching staff, asset management, salary cap) and is still in the early stages.

One area where I’m hoping to see improvement is how the team responds to adversity like falling behind to a good team (Boston), facing a team that gets under their skin (Ottawa), or getting questionable officiating. If they don’t look to be getting more resilient and continue to fall apart in these situations, I’m worried that no matter how well other aspects of the process may be working, the team will continue to be fragile. How disappointing would it be to have all the talent in the world but not be able to deliver when things get tough *cough* Tampa Bay *cough*?

Good post..

 

[LORDE]

So you're saying that teams require a complete rebuild, ship everyone out and start anew whenever they can't get over that final hump?

I'll agree to disagree.

Players should've been replaced as needed IMO.
There's no reason why you can't bring in young talent on the fly.

Look at what we have now and I love the team, the young players and all but this is just not the place for development.

The NHL is for the finished product.

We defintey disagree then. There is a reason they can't be 'replaced as needed' since you either need to trade them or replace them through the draft, the latter of which takes time. NMC clauses and you know, the CAP complicate matters further.

If I had my way, no one from that 2014 would still be here except MAYBE Hank

 

[NYR]

We defintey disagree then. There is a reason they can't be 'replaced as needed' since you either need to trade them or replace them through the draft, the latter of which takes time. NMC clauses and you know, the CAP complicate matters further.

If I had my way, no one from that 2014 would still be here except MAYBE Hank

Question and not being snarky.

How has every other team managed to turn their teams around since the beginning of time?

The answer does not include blowing it up..

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

Question and not being snarky.

How has every other team managed to turn their teams around since the beginning of time?

The answer does not include blowing it up..

Well, which teams? The ones that win or the ones that are mediocre-good?

 

[JHS]

This is a complete ****ing clown show but you'll always have people that refuse to see things for what they actually are.

But but.. We'll be a contender in 2 years then 3 years then 5 years.. Blah blah blah lol

Much like the coach, the GM won't be here either the next time this team wins a cup.

Too each his own I guess..

Could not agree more. What’s incredible is how so many just blindly love the idea of a rebuild but are so wrong about how rebuilds work. Let’s play it out using a different team. Toronto for example had several top picks in a row, have a legitimate top 10 talent in the league, have a much better core of forwards and took a similar path to be terrible for years but made the right choice and hired Mike Babcock as coach. What’s happening right now? The team has incredible talent but Babcock continually says they have no idea how to win and can’t take the next step... hmmmmmm so EVEN IF the Rangers could develop the talent the Leafs have and get the top 10 talent and hire the right coach, the missing piece will be THE WINNING CULTURE!!! And it’s even a long shot the Rangers will even rebuild as well as Toronto has.

 

[NYR]

Well, which teams? The ones that win or the ones that are mediocre-good?

Every team.
Who blows it up other than EDM because they're too cheap to put money into the team?
NYR don't have that problem..

 

[eco's bones]

I'm gonna refrain from arguing back and forth with certain people from here on out since it's a waste of my finger texting energy.
That said.. Hopefully I can point something out without causing mass hysteria from fragile people lol.
If we exclude Kakko because he's fresh off the boat from Finland, 6 out of the 9 players you mentioned have been developed from different organizations.

What part has Quinn played in any of that?

This is dumb. DeAngelo for instance has developed as a player with the Rangers whether or not he was drafted by the Lightning and played his first game with the Coyotes. Hajek, Lindgren, Fox and Howden turned pro with the Rangers.

 

[NYR]

Could not agree more. What’s incredible is how so many just blindly love the idea of a rebuild but are so wrong about how rebuilds work. Let’s play it out using a different team. Toronto for example had several top picks in a row, have a legitimate top 10 talent in the league, have a much better core of forwards and took a similar path to be terrible for years but made the right choice and hired Mike Babcock as coach. What’s happening right now? The team has incredible talent but Babcock continually says they have no idea how to win and can’t take the next step... hmmmmmm so EVEN IF the Rangers could develop the talent the Leafs have and get the top 10 talent and hire the right coach, the missing piece will be THE WINNING CULTURE!!! And it’s even a long shot the Rangers will even rebuild as well as Toronto has.

Outcast Ryan Strome is our #2 center but clearly they're doing it the right way

 

[LORDE]

Question and not being snarky.

How has every other team managed to turn their teams around since the beginning of time?

The answer does not include blowing it up..

With top draft picks... multiple ones.

We've had one and he's 18.

This is an argument we had for the past 24 months tho

 

[NYR]

This is dumb.

Is it really dumb or is it just you along with very few others that enjoy watching a farm team?
#Conspiracy

Save the prospect BS for Hartford where it belongs.

When you're hiring a coach, what's the first thing that you think of?
Answer.. You want the best man for the job and not some green college coach who has no business behind an NHL bench.

What is it exactly that escapes common sense here??

 

[JHS]

Is it really dumb or is it just you along with very few others that enjoy watching a farm team?
#Conspiracy

Save the prospect BS for Hartford where it belongs.

When you're hiring a coach, what's the first thing that you think of?
Answer.. You want the best man for the job and not some green college coach who has no business behind an NHL bench.

What is it exactly that escapes common sense here??

Been saying this same idea for years on here and predominantly people just fall in love with the idea of the Rangers one day being good. Meanwhile, the league is littered with teams that have tried this same approach and can’t get it right- Calagary, Edmonton, Phoenix, Florida just to name the really bad ones— even Toronto and Winnipeg who have clealrybhad much more success with the rebuilds, can’t yet climb the next hill and both drafted incredibly well.

Rebuilds are a mistake- it’s the wave of the “now” in New York sports but really it’s impossible to get everything right!

Relating to coaching, I think it’s very interesting that almost all those teams above tried the “young up and comer coach” and eventually gave that idea away and went with the veteran and experienced guy.

Panthers now have Quenville after trying Tom Rowe and Bob Boughber

Toronto now has Babcock after Randy Carlyle and Peter Horachuk

Jets went from Claude Noel to Paul Maurice

Calgary now has Bill Peters from Glen Gulutzan

But yeah why should the Rangers think that maybe they could learn a lesson from all these other teams who “developed” talent. Each went with the no name guy, he was fired within 3 years and they got an established NHL coach— and don’t pull the “well these teams are now no longer developing” line. That’s nonsense— the reason these teams went with the established NHL guy is they learned from their mistake and the team furthest along in their rebuild went with the established NHL coach from the start( Toronto!).

Coaching matters!

 

[NYR]

Been saying this same idea for years on here and predominantly people just fall in love with the idea of the Rangers one day being good. Meanwhile, the league is littered with teams that have tried this same approach and can’t get it right- Calagary, Edmonton, Phoenix, Florida just to name the really bad ones— even Toronto and Winnipeg who have clealrybhad much more success with the rebuilds, can’t yet climb the next hill and both drafted incredibly well.

Rebuilds are a mistake- it’s the wave of the “now” in New York sports but really it’s impossible to get everything right!

Relating to coaching, I think it’s very interesting that almost all those teams above tried the “young up and comer coach” and eventually gave that idea away and went with the veteran and experienced guy.

Panthers now have Quenville after trying Tom Rowe and Bob Boughber

Toronto now has Babcock after Randy Carlyle and Peter Horachuk

Jets went from Claude Noel to Paul Maurice

Calgary now has Bill Peters from Glen Gulutzan

But yeah why should the Rangers think that maybe they could learn a lesson from all these other teams who “developed” talent. Each went with the no name guy, he was fired within 3 years and they got an established NHL coach— and don’t pull the “well these teams are now no longer developing” line. That’s nonsense— the reason these teams went with the established NHL guy is they learned from their mistake and the team furthest along in their rebuild went with the established NHL coach from the start( Toronto!).

Coaching matters!

You nailed it dude.

And by no means am I expecting miracles or think this is any kind of small undertaking but what I do expect should be more than "manageable"..(I will use that term loosely)
A coaching staff that's up to snuff and can be effective from development to on- ice strategy, a realistic system that utilizes the team on the ice, players that aren't forced to play over their heads and that can actually play the proper roles.

All you have to do is look at Lamerello.
He brings in the right coach, killed it in the draft and hardly has a full roster yet they're on a 10 game winning streak all within a year.

JG is the polar opposite.. Horrible signings, no frills coach and every move is a gamble.

Craziness..

 

[SnowblindNYR]

I would have bet my house on Staal playing this game. Still extremely disappointing. No backbone for Quinn at all. He's more worried about managing perception than winning.

 

[Leetch3]

I would have bet my house on Staal playing this game. Still extremely disappointing. No backbone for Quinn at all. He's more worried about managing perception than winning.

did you think he was going to sit for ever? he went from never ever sitting to sitting 3 games. anyone that says they didn't 100% expect staal back in after 1 game regardless of the outcome of the game is lying...so sitting him 3 straight is what I call a good start #GlassHalfFull

 

[SnowblindNYR]

did you think he was going to sit for ever? he went from never ever sitting to sitting 3 games. anyone that says they didn't 100% expect staal back in after 1 game regardless of the outcome of the game is lying...so sitting him 3 straight is what I call a good start #GlassHalfFull

But what for reason related to what his job of winning the hockey game would he play Staal again if other D-men aren't injured?

 

[Leetch3]

But what for reason related to what his job of winning the hockey game would he play Staal again if other D-men aren't injured?

thats assuming that his job is to win hockey games...

 

[Pawnee Rangers]

it’s clear he trusts Howden over Anderson. You don’t like they way he’s developing one player. So what. But he’s also got an 18, 20
and 21 year old playing big minutes in the top 9. He’s got 2/3 rookies playing defense on a nightly basis. He had a pair of 21 year olds defending a one goal lead against Tampa. And they’re all playing pretty good and contributing. Stop pouting over a kid who will get plenty of chances to play this season. Some of you need to get a clue. You’re embarrassing yourself.

 

[redwhiteandblue]

Why do so many people deny it’s not odd that Lias has been given a longer leash? Haha I honestly don’t get why it’s hard to accept. No one is handing him a letter or penciling him and giving him a raise. The team is rebuilding though and after spending his first two years being an obedient loyal dog, he then comes into TC and plays really well. He stood out amongst the young guys. He got rewarded with 4th line duties and carrying Smith and Haley.

It’s just odd he hasn’t been given 10-20 games like other guys have gotten. Even more odd fans that deny it or get triggered that others notice it.

 

[Edge]

Why do so many people deny it’s not odd that Lias has been given a longer leash? Haha I honestly don’t get why it’s hard to accept. No one is handing him a letter or penciling him and giving him a raise. The team is rebuilding though and after spending his first two years being an obedient loyal dog, he then comes into TC and plays really well. He stood out amongst the young guys. He got rewarded with 4th line duties and carrying Smith and Haley.

It’s just odd he hasn’t been given 10-20 games like other guys have gotten. Even more odd fans that deny it or get triggered that others notice it.

The weird thing is that I’m not even sure anyone who objects to this approach has made the claim that Andersson has blown the doors off. It’s typically focused on how he compares to others who have been given longer leashes despite looking as bad, or worse at times.

I’ve found that the more that type of question is raised, the less conviction the pushback tends to have. I think for a lot of people, even on some subconscious level, there’s an element of, “You know what? I really can’t explain it or fully defend it. It is a little a weird.”

At the end of the day they might not have as big of a problem with it as others, but I get the sense that they see it too on some level.

Then there’s the people who just don’t like Andersson period and this whole thing is just right in their wheelhouse. I think they’re definitely the minority. A very vocal minority, and I suspect some of them have multiple accounts, but a minority nonetheless.