Player Discussion David Quinn

[Machinehead]

You know you're itching to get in here, Guy

I know you'll be disappointed but I actually don't have a strong opinion for you today.

Don't really care for most of what's going on but I believe you need to take one step at a time. I'd like to see Ruff gone first.

 

[NYR]

I know you'll be disappointed but I actually don't have a strong opinion for you today.

Don't really care for most of what's going on but I believe you need to take one step at a time. I'd like to see Ruff gone first.

Actually I am disappointed you don't have a strong opinion but the fact that you said you don't care implies the complete opposite.

Ruff has his faults no doubt BUT this is not Ruff's system.
You get rid of Ruff and it's gonna be the same shit as AV.
3 defensive coaches, same results..

 

[eco's bones]

Well most people on here did not think Pionk was an NHler in fact I can find some posts here calling him the worst defenseman in the NHL last year. People saying Namestnikov has no offense I’ve ability and was a product of Kucherov and Stamkos. Now he’s playing with guys like Tyler Ennis and whoever off the street and putting up numbers. Coaching matters, and right now Namestnikov is getting coached by a rookie head coach who took our sophomore head coach to coaching school last time we played them.

I actually liked Pionk. One of the few that did here--though to me he was thrown into the deep end. For lack of a legit 1st pairing RD he went from Hartford player one year to that the next. He wasn't ready for it. He should have come in on the bottom pair. I think he can be a good player but I don't think he'll ever be a legit 1st pairing D. I would easily take Trouba over Pionk or Shattenkirk as a defenseman and if someone last year had proposed all of Pionk, Shattenkirk and Namestnikov for Trouba I would have signed up for that immediately. Trouba can legit play first pair and you need at least one guy like that so you can properly put your other defensemen in roles that fit their skillsets and experience.

But if you're asking me did I think Pionk would bomb in Winnipeg--I thought he'd do alright. That he be a good player. As far as Shattenkirk I thought he'd fit in pretty well in Tampa where his greatest weakness his defending would be mitigated by the other D there. It's not hard to fit into---find yourself a role on a deeper team. Namestnikov has found himself on a team meanwhile where he's depended on more than he has ever had before. In Tampa he was usually a 3rd liner--when he went up with Kucherov and Stamkos for one season he was in a Jesper Fast like role of being the responsible one on the line. With the Rangers he couldn't find a top 6 role either. With Ottawa here's a chance he's never had before.

I'd still easily take Trouba over the whole bunch of them though.

 

[Machinehead]

Actually I am disappointed you don't have a strong opinion but the fact that you said you don't care implies the complete opposite.

Ruff has his faults no doubt BUT this is not Ruff's system.
You get rid of Ruff and it's gonna be the same **** as AV.
3 defensive coaches, same results..

If we fire Ruff and it's the same thing, sure, burn Quinn at the stake.

I just think he deserves that chance. We're not going anywhere right now anyway.

 

[haveandare]

I think the reason that people point to the coaching as an issue is that by several metrics, we're the worst team at even strength in the league. We grade out as one of the worst teams in the past few decades. Of course, we're not actually as bad as these metrics would suggest but a lot of it is from having one of the highest power play success rates in the league as well as goaltending that exceeds expectations. We have a lot of youth so its understandable for us to not be good but you also wouldn't expect the team to be historically bad especially after adding Panarin and Trouba.

Being historically bad for a dozen games is one thing, but they’re being compared to bad teams over entire seasons I’d assume. Not really an apples to apples comparison.

Even with Panarin and Trouba the roster is not good at all. Without them it’d be the worst in the league hands down. Panarin is excellent but he’s our only player near that tier save for Mika who has flirted with that level but not been able to put together whole seasons of it. Up front theres them, then no proven players at 2C, 3C or 4C. Trouba is good and something we needed but not the type of guy that makes a whole team. He’s not really even a clear 1D on a contending team.

 

[NYR]

If we fire Ruff and it's the same thing, sure, burn Quinn at the stake.

I just think he deserves that chance. We're not going anywhere right now anyway.

Me personally.. I'm tired of giving people chances and that includes Ruff but outside of the kids, produce or GTFO.
That's where I'm at right now.

 

[True Blue]

You haven't given me one ounce of note-worthy info to make me want to put any effort into debating this with substance so I'm done talking about this

So no, you are incapable of defending your points or answering direct questions. Just making sure we are crystal clear. Makes it very easy to preach from a soap box.

 

[JHS]

There is nothing to suggest that this is correct. The D in Toronto has major issues and so does their bottom 6. The G ain't exactly a world beater either. What exactly makes Babcock the right coach anyway?

How did you miss so many enormously important and obvious details? It just looks like you ignored a ton of info that wasn't convenient to your conclusion so that you can blame some arbitrary, impossible to prove factor for the Rangers possibly not winning in the future. It's a dead end point and a particularly weak one at that.
I think the way you think about the sport has fundamental deficits that you really should try to correct. idk why you even present your thoughts bc if I had to rate the way this place responds to your opinions I'd vote for overwhelmingly negative. Can't be fun for you.

Got it- group think or nothing else. Just so you know, I’ve been involved in hockey for 25plus years with 22 being involved at high level travel and high school hockey. I can analyze a game better than most on here and most just look at players and not what’s actually going on out actually ice ice. If you don’t like me or my posts feel free to ignore me but keep the BS cheap personal insults out of this. You just showed me what your made of— and this board.

Regarding Babcock, it would help if you actually paid attention to what he’s been saying and you make my point for me. IF a team with much more talent than the RAngers might ever get/have still have serious holes that won’t allow them to move forward to the next level, it highlights that talent alone is not enough to develop winning. Players need to develop how to win games.

You are right right, my incredibly well supported conclusions by almost every professional athlete and high level coach are worthless here. I’ll bring the Pom poms next time.

 

[NYR]

So no, you are incapable of defending your points or answering direct questions. Just making sure we are crystal clear. Makes it very easy to preach from a soap box.

TB.. I'm not gonna keep spinning my wheels with you.
You still haven't even answered my first question.
I asked you what it was that qualified DQ as the HC to lead this team from your point of view and rather than answering the question, all you've done is defend him instead of explaining.
All with an insulting tone.
Then.. You start calling people that have an opposing opinion then yourself unhinged and idiotic.
Do you like the taste of your own medicine?

I just asked basically the same question on the last page.

I don't believe DQ is an NHL HC.

Prove me wrong... Please and thank you lol

 

[nyr2k2]

We have some real shitposters here. Funny how they all tend to think really highly of themselves. Humility is in short supply. And they're clairvoyant, too. I don't know why I bother with the "see hidden content" or whatever.

Far too early to judge Quinn with any type of certainty. There are things I don't like, but in general I think he has been a positive addition to the organization.

 

[JHS]

I just don't see one thing that Quinn (and his staff) do well. Its certainly not defense, and its not offense either. Its not the Powerplay, its not the Penalty kill. Its not the transition game, the neutral zone, or cycling in the offensive zone. And people want to say "oh maybe its the players they just suck what is he supposed to do with guys like Pionk and Namestnikov and Shattenkirk they're just not good" and then they get out of his "system" and they find their game.

I don't like this coach, I don't think he's good enough at all for the NHL level. People around here are in a forgiving mood because we've won 2 in a row but we got flat out DOMINATED against Carolina, embarrassingly so and if we had merely league average goalies we would have run out of the building. And its been happening constantly, giving up 20 shots in the 1st period, not generating much of our own, relying on individual efforts to get any offense, etc. Its not sustainable and we saw what happens when a goalie doesn't bring his A+ game with Georgie against Ottawa.

Thanks for pointing this out. The Rangers are not getting better and actually look pretty terrible from an X’s and O’s standpoint. The issue is, a lot of people on here can’t see the X’s and O’s when watching the game so it makes sense only a handful of us who don’t think Quinn is the guy for the job are vocal.

 

[NYR]

We have some real ****posters here. Funny how they all tend to think really highly of themselves. Humility is in short supply. And they're clairvoyant, too. I don't know why I bother with the "see hidden content" or whatever.

Far too early to judge Quinn with any type of certainty. There are things I don't like, but in general I think he has been a positive addition to the organization.

Yuppers..It must've been that profound sense of humility that made you click on "hidden content" and call people shit posters
#Brilliant

 

[eco's bones]

Quinn was hired to coach the team. He is being paid for it. Like it or not it's absurd to say he's not an NHL coach because frankly he is.....or at least until he's replaced. The Rangers so far this year are one game above .500 and all that despite the fact for the last 6 games they've been playing without their first line center who is arguably (I'd say he was) the best or the most important player on the team. And the Rangers have scored one more goal (46) than they've given up (45) which is a number I like to be on the right side of. All that with a lot of 1st and 2nd year players--pretty much the youngest team in the league.

People who think that a team with so many 21 and younger players aren't going to have issues at times are pretty much out to lunch and I don't really care if they've played pro or college, coached or reffed hockey half their lives--they're out to lunch. Close to half the Rangers team have yet to even touch their primes. This is why this team needs a bit of patience. It's a team still in construction and for those who would have stayed the course with what we had before the letter--it's like wanting to cross a bridge despite the fact it's on the point of collapse. There are people who will want to do that and complain about the process of rebuilding a new one but they're not rational. It seems that's what we have here with a handful of voices and to be honest I'm not interested in turning this into a personal slugfest---I'm at the point where I'd rather just ignore them.

 

[Hi ImHFNYR]

Got it- group think or nothing else. Just so you know, I’ve been involved in hockey for 25plus years with 22 being involved at high level travel and high school hockey. I can analyze a game better than most on here and most just look at players and not what’s actually going on out actually ice ice. If you don’t like me or my posts feel free to ignore me but keep the BS cheap personal insults out of this. You just showed me what your made of— and this board.

Regarding Babcock, it would help if you actually paid attention to what he’s been saying and you make my point for me. IF a team with much more talent than the RAngers might ever get/have still have serious holes that won’t allow them to move forward to the next level, it highlights that talent alone is not enough to develop winning. Players need to develop how to win games.

You are right right, my incredibly well supported conclusions by almost every professional athlete and high level coach are worthless here. I’ll bring the Pom poms next time.

Bold 1
Group think?This comment makes no sense. I know WHY you think it does but if you read what's actually being said you'd realize this is nonsense

2
This is meaningless. There's a good reason why high school hockey players rarely ever get drafted high, let alone walk into the NHL right away. It is also irrelevant to the current topic where you have demonstrated a complete lack of awareness of almost every aspect of Toronto's team with the exception of the fact that they have some highly skilled players in their top 6. If you DO have a better ability to analyze anything hockey related...well it damn sure doesn't show up anywhere...at all...let alone in this topic. Your brag is the equivalent of a guy who became an apprentice level auto mechanic thinking he's ready to be an expert in building rockets. Sure they're vehicles but the knowledge you lack makes you closer to an average Joe then it does to a capable pro hockey analyst. What is more likely is that you are severely overestimating your opinions bc of your minor minor minor league experiences.

3 Yes. Everything in my post responds to this appropriately. Your inability to figure out how my comment fits into the discussion is not my problem

4 Your incredibly well supported conclusions? That's plural. We are only discussing one conclusion of yours. I don't think you understand the conversation which is what I said before.

It's not a personal insult to point out that your posts are consistently dismissed, ignored and disliked. I'm just pointing out the fact that most people dislike what you're saying. Sure there's something to be said about not just going along with group think. But there's also something to be said for when everyone tells you it's you...

Clearly you dislike being constantly challenged and you don't like when it's pointed out how your comments are met with an overwhelmingly negative response so why exactly do you subject yourself to this? (Which, again, not a personal insult to say your comments are poorly received) I don't get what you get out of it.

 

[Mac n Gs]

Quinn was hired to coach the team. He is being paid for it. Like it or not it's absurd to say he's not an NHL coach because frankly he is.....or at least until he's replaced. The Rangers so far this year are one game above .500 and all that despite the fact for the last 6 games they've been playing without their first line center who is arguably (I'd say he was) the best or the most important player on the team. And the Rangers have scored one more goal (46) than they've given up (45) which is a number I like to be on the right side of. All that with a lot of 1st and 2nd year players--pretty much the youngest team in the league.

People who think that a team with so many 21 and younger players aren't going to have issues at times are pretty much out to lunch and I don't really care if they've played pro or college, coached or reffed hockey half their lives--they're out to lunch. Close to half the Rangers team have yet to even touch their primes. This is why this team needs a bit of patience. It's a team still in construction and for those who would have stayed the course with what we had before the letter--it's like wanting to cross a bridge despite the fact it's on the point of collapse. There are people who will want to do that and complain about the process of rebuilding a new one but they're not rational. It seems that's what we have here with a handful of voices and to be honest I'm not interested in turning this into a personal slugfest---I'm at the point where I'd rather just ignore them.

In addition, if you were always against the rebuild, then of course you're going to dislike Quinn as coach. I have my gripes with him, but it's hard to ignore just how challenging of a roster he's been given, and we all know that he signed up the job fully knowing this would happen. I think he's had more of a positive impact than not, despite me disagreeing with some of his tactics.

 

[redwhiteandblue]

I suspect he has several holes in his game and they're giving him low minutes on the 4th line while he irons stuff out which is EXACTLY what they did with Chytil last year. We know Lias has poor skating ability and low offensive ability. Sounds like a young prospect like that should be in the bottom 6. Makes tons of sense.

I honestly just don't have the pateince to sit and watch games as much anymore so I haven't seen enough of Lias to judge as well as I'd like to. I know three things:

This is what I saw with our prospects last year and it worked
Lias' abilities peg him as a bottom 6 guy atm
When I asked this place what it is about Lias' game that works so well a bunch of people lost their **** at me bc they realized they had no answer.

I think their egos were too big to allow them to acknowledge that they didn't actually know what made Lias worthy of more minutes. They just decided he did and nothing would make them consider that maybe juuuust maybe it's not necessary at the moment. A few of them also realized they didn't actually have anything based on the actual on ice product to base their opinion on. Which is really telling

Well it's hard to get a look at a guy when you don't have patience to sit and watch games. Lias' biggest issue is he seems once in a while to grip the stick to hard, if you will. Most games he's effective in his role. I could understand some of the knocks last year, but as I've mentioned previously, he definitely made strides this offseason. He's been effective honing the defensive side of his game, I just don't understand how he's suppose to get any better offensively or show what he has when he's stapled to mediocre wingers in 4th line duties.

The thing that's weird is why Howden has never been held accountable like Lias. Howden has looked completely ineffective for large periods of time. At his very best he hasn't thrived at any point for more than a 2-4 game clip here and there. Why are we wasting so much time on this one kid when we have a kid picked 7th overall who has done well in his role and given not nearly the same leash? It's just baffling. I've seen worse skaters than Lias be very good in this league but they were at least given an opportunity to flourish.

It's just baffling that they've avoided this one experiment for going into 2 seasons now. Howden hasn't done anything spectacular to avoid seeing what we have in Lias. It's really as simple as that whether you have a Howden bias or Lias bias. I have neither but it's frustrating as a fan to see it ignored.

 

[Hi ImHFNYR]

Well it's hard to get a look at a guy when you don't have patience to sit and watch games. Lias' biggest issue is he seems once in a while to grip the stick to hard, if you will. Most games he's effective in his role. I could understand some of the knocks last year, but as I've mentioned previously, he definitely made strides this offseason. He's been effective honing the defensive side of his game, I just don't understand how he's suppose to get any better offensively or show what he has when he's stapled to mediocre wingers in 4th line duties.

The thing that's weird is why Howden has never been held accountable like Lias. Howden has looked completely ineffective for large periods of time. At his very best he hasn't thrived at any point for more than a 2-4 game clip here and there. Why are we wasting so much time on this one kid when we have a kid picked 7th overall who has done well in his role and given not nearly the same leash? It's just baffling. I've seen worse skaters than Lias be very good in this league but they were at least given an opportunity to flourish.

It's just baffling that they've avoided this one experiment for going into 2 seasons now. Howden hasn't done anything spectacular to avoid seeing what we have in Lias. It's really as simple as that whether you have a Howden bias or Lias bias. I have neither but it's frustrating as a fan to see it ignored.

first bold

Yea, that's why I mentioned it. Wanted to be fair. Didn't want to represent myself as an expert. But let's not pretend like watching every game is necessary either. I didn't say i never watch.

Howden is a different player. Different size, speed, skills and abilities. It's reasonable to assume they like what he brings more right now and I don't think it's about production or ineffectiveness. What is Howden doing wrong to deserve a demotion and what is lias doing right to deserve the promotion?

What would Lias bring to the role that would make him better overall than Howden?

Why do it after only 14 games? That's barely anytime. These guys need more than a dozen games in any one particular role before moving them for no particular reason. They're going to have good games where you can reinforce good habits and bad games where you can identify what to fix. You take Howden out of that role this early in the season and you deny him the opportunity to go through that in this particular season. Not that I even see him making egregious errors. Same for Lias

It is much smarter to leave both guys where they are for an extended period of time and shake things up after a significant sample. If Lias is promoted by game 40 and excels than why would any of this be a problem? It wouldnt be. Which is why imo people just lack the patience and the correct mindset when it comes to this issue.

As for last year? Lias was a much worse player overall last year. So much so that i can't even pretend like last years games count towards this arbitrary "Howden has had too long compared to Lias" meter. I really liked what lias did in pre-season. I'm on record saying I'd have had no problem with him getting promoted to start the season. But he wasn't so good that I ever thought it was necessary to promote him either.

 

[MyLoveIsBlue]

We have some real ****posters here. Funny how they all tend to think really highly of themselves. Humility is in short supply. And they're clairvoyant, too. I don't know why I bother with the "see hidden content" or whatever.

Far too early to judge Quinn with any type of certainty. There are things I don't like, but in general I think he has been a positive addition to the organization.

If I had a little bit more humility, I would be perfect.

 

[Hi ImHFNYR]

Thanks for pointing this out. The Rangers are not getting better and actually look pretty terrible from an X’s and O’s standpoint. The issue is, a lot of people on here can’t see the X’s and O’s when watching the game so it makes sense only a handful of us who don’t think Quinn is the guy for the job are vocal.

Give some details. If you made reasonable arguments based on hockey people wouldlisten. You never do

 

[True Blue]

TB.. I'm not gonna keep spinning my wheels with you.
You still haven't even answered my first question.
I asked you what it was that qualified DQ as the HC to lead this team from your point of view and rather than answering the question, all you've done is defend him instead of explaining.
All with an insulting tone.

What qualified him as an NHL head coach? I don't know. Maybe it is the three years he spend as head coach of the Avs AHL team, followed by a year as an NHL assistant coach? Maybe it is the years of great success at the college level with players that are as young as half of the Rangers roster? Maybe it was Gorton's judgement that led him to hire Quinn in the first place?

What else are you looking for from a first time NHL coach? What other qualifications could one possibly bring when hired to coach the youngest team in the league during the infancy of a complete rebuild? Going by your standards, it seems that the NHL will run out of coaches soon as they will all die off as there can be no NHL coach unless he has NHL coaching experience.

Now that your question has been answered, perhaps you will do justice and answer a question that you have avoided answering. This was posed to you by more than just me. What NHL team that won the Cup did not go through a rebuild at some point?

Then.. You start calling people that have an opposing opinion then yourself unhinged and idiotic.
Do you like the taste of your own medicine?

I called your assertion that Quinn was taking pot shots at Kakko by saying he is going to have to adjust his game to the NHL level idiotic. And, yes, I called posters that took this rallying cry up as unhinged. And I still stand by what I said.

I just asked basically the same question on the last page.

Question answered. Now answer mine.

I don't believe DQ is an NHL HC.

Prove me wrong... Please and thank you lol

How exactly does not PROVE that someone is an NHL coach? Ok. He is coaching in the NHL and was hand picked to do so by an NHL GM. Hence, he is an NHL coach. Now prove me different.

 

[JHS]

Bold 1
Group think?This comment makes no sense. I know WHY you think it does but if you read what's actually being said you'd realize this is nonsense

2
This is meaningless. There's a good reason why high school hockey players rarely ever get drafted high, let alone walk into the NHL right away. It is also irrelevant to the current topic where you have demonstrated a complete lack of awareness of almost every aspect of Toronto's team with the exception of the fact that they have some highly skilled players in their top 6. If you DO have a better ability to analyze anything hockey related...well it damn sure doesn't show up anywhere...at all...let alone in this topic. Your brag is the equivalent of a guy who became an apprentice level auto mechanic thinking he's ready to be an expert in building rockets. Sure they're vehicles but the knowledge you lack makes you closer to an average Joe then it does to a capable pro hockey analyst. What is more likely is that you are severely overestimating your opinions bc of your minor minor minor league experiences.

3 Yes. Everything in my post responds to this appropriately. Your inability to figure out how my comment fits into the discussion is not my problem

4 Your incredibly well supported conclusions? That's plural. We are only discussing one conclusion of yours. I don't think you understand the conversation which is what I said before.

It's not a personal insult to point out that your posts are consistently dismissed, ignored and disliked. I'm just pointing out the fact that most people dislike what you're saying. Sure there's something to be said about not just going along with group think. But there's also something to be said for when everyone tells you it's you...

Clearly you dislike being constantly challenged and you don't like when it's pointed out how your comments are met with an overwhelmingly negative response so why exactly do you subject yourself to this? (Which, again, not a personal insult to say your comments are poorly received) I don't get what you get out of it.

If you are aware of the definition of group think- it's the promotion of one idea over the other and supported by a mass who actually does not even know what they are talking about. Also, lots of times people are swayed by the desire to be "liked" thus afraid or unable to share something outside of the common held belief. Your attack on me for pointing out an opinion other than the common held belief is the definition of.

Again, Toronto has BETTER talent than the Rangers, a BETTER forward group, a BETTER defense and is in the next stage of a rebuild-- and still can't get it right because lots of their younger players developed in culture where they were not winning games. I'm not sure how that show a lack of understanding of the Toronto organization. A simple google search, which I did before making this claim, reveals that as far back as 2016, Babcock was questioning teh compete level of his players( sond familiar) and some still have not responded. SO the logical question is why-- I'll tell you- because they don't have examples of what it actually takes to rise to the next level because the organization is predominately filled with young guys at similar stages of their career and the coach( who in theri case) is the only guy who actually knows what it takes to win the Stanley Cup and is appropriately challenging them. Now let's take that into the Rangers. This team is filled with similair stage players who equally have not clue how to win at this level but the key difference is that also have a coach who is lost about how to win at this level. So who's in better shape here??? Don't the Rangers have t beat the Leafs to get to the next level? If you just look at things in your little insular bubble you fail to learn the lessons from other organizations.

I'm not trying to hype my hockey credentials-- I know what they are and I know they stack up to anyone on this site probably favorably

 

[True Blue]

I'm not trying to hype my hockey credentials-- I know what they are and I know they stack up to anyone on this site probably favorably

Really? This is like the guy who touted how many "likes" he has as evidence of his knowledge.

 

[JHS]

Give some details. If you made reasonable arguments based on hockey people wouldlisten. You never do

Sure-
Brady Skjei, gotten progressively worse
Lias Anderson, Even after improving his hockey skating, still stuck on the 4th line and can't make progress
Pavel Buchenevich- Can't take the leap to being a top line forward although admittedly has looked better
The entire defensive structure- Players routinely out of position, can't make outlet passes, team giving up 20 plus shots a period and ranking near the bottom of the league in all possible defensive measures

You also just can't help yourself but take cheap shots can you? I've made far more relevant hockey arguments than practically anyoen participating in this thread. It's just you don't like them.

 

[JHS]

Really? This is like the guy who touted how many "likes" he has as evidence of his knowledge.

Yeah- I don't need to. I never tell people to stop positing unlike some others on here. The complete lack of respect some people show is disgusting and when I need to defend myself I will.

 

[JHS]

Ill make an effort to move this into a coaching discussion and not just personal back and forth. Watching today’s game, I notice how little the Rangers look around when playing defense in their own zone. They all basically stare at the puck. That’s a bad habit to get into and one of the main reasons they keep giving up so many grade a chances. Good and well coached defensive teams have their heads on a swivel when defending so as to see the cutters and be aware of their position relative to where the opposition is. I’d imagine a little reminder of this might be in order from the staff.