Speculation: Do You Want Gerard Gallant Fired?

[TheDirtyH]

Without Gallant we had 60 points in 56 (88 pt pace) and we improved to 110 and made the ECF. He was a finalist for the Jack. Would you say that Gallant belonged on that list going into this season? Are you suggesting that he has fallen off the list based on the first 46 games where we are on pace for 102 points?

I thought I made it pretty explicit where I land with Gallant.

I will say that unless Gallant had something major to do with the season Igor had last year, then no I wouldn't suggest he belonged on that list. But, I wouldn't argue against anyone who would. As I said, I'm not on team 'fire gallant.'

 

[Leonardo87]

I remember a large portion of the board wanted Gallant above everyone else.

I think they will make roster tweaks before moving on from Gallant. I think his seat is not even warmed up yet. A lot depends how he does in the playoffs. We are being a tad overzealous now, imo.

 

[huerter]

YES

I don't want him losing his livelihood, I wish him all the well being a fellow human being deserves.

But, he shouldn't be coaching this team. Plain and simple.

The fact he thinks Vesey and Goodrow are top 6 even top 9 players is all we need to know.

Stop line numbering

 

[Machinehead]

For me at least it's not that I think Gallant sucks. He's a decent coach even if I don't think the roster's potential is being maximized. I just think Trotz is that good. If Trotz wasn't out there, I would just stick with Gallant.

Trotz has an extremely poor record getting the most out of forwards.

 

[KirkAlbuquerque]

Trotz has an extremely poor record getting the most out of forwards.

Didn’t Kuznetsov have his best years under Trotz? And he’s the laziest Russian since Kovalev

 

[Machinehead]

Didn’t Kuznetsov have his best years under Trotz? And he’s the laziest Russian since Kovalev

Yeah, when Trotz got handed pre-developed superstars, they were *checks notes* superstars. Maybe Panarin would be good again.

Kuznetsov is really underrated. He's a 0.82 PPG player and he low-key doesn't play that much. He averages 17:30 a game and has never been a regular on Washington's PP1.

Trotz is a bit overrated in general, for me. He's solid and he pretty much guarantees you'll be in the mix in the playoffs, but his teams are shockingly boring and he's been to the SCF once in 23 seasons. People talk about him like he has multiple Cups and the reality is that he's a perennial bridesmaid.

The only time he ever got over the hump is when the Caps had the biggest playoff PDO bender since PDO is being measured. Like three of their opponents beat the pants off of them en route to that Cup. Their series win over Pittsburgh was almost as lopsided in Pittsburgh's favor as, well, our series win over Pittsburgh.

 

[huerter]

This is the coach we need

 

[PANARIN BREAD FAN]

trotz n sutter ehh?

even q

why bother. the same usual suspects on this board will just shit on them as they did with av, gg, and all the rest before. how much anyone would want to wager here that they would shit on john cooper if he was ranger coach?

 

[TheDirtyH]

Yeah, when Trotz got handed pre-developed superstars, they were *checks notes* superstars. Maybe Panarin would be good again.

Kuznetsov is really underrated. He's a 0.82 PPG player and he low-key doesn't play that much. He averages 17:30 a game and has never been a regular on Washington's PP1.

Trotz is a bit overrated in general, for me. He's solid and he pretty much guarantees you'll be in the mix in the playoffs, but his teams are shockingly boring and he's been to the SCF once in 23 seasons. People talk about him like he has multiple Cups and the reality is that he's a perennial bridesmaid.

The only time he ever got over the hump is when the Caps had the biggest playoff PDO bender since PDO is being measured. Like three of their opponents beat the pants off of them en route to that Cup. Their series win over Pittsburgh was almost as lopsided in Pittsburgh's favor as, well, our series win over Pittsburgh.

He's so overrated. His entire resume was Nashville not being as bad as other expansion teams and making the playoffs regularly. Their deepest run they got bounced by Arizona didn't they?

He won a cup with Washington and that's great for him and them, but that team was favored to win it all for like a decade straight before he got there. Enough kicks at the can and OV willed them to it. Then on long island he turned an awful but exciting team into a good defensive team that managed to lose twice to Tampa in back to back years and somehow you'd think, hearing them talked about, that they'd won b2b cups, not the lightning.

Trotz would come here and tell a team that already can't score that they need to win every game 1-0. They'd probably manage well enough, but I think I saw that movie enough times with Hank and Torts to know how it ends.

 

[Machinehead]

He's so overrated. His entire resume was Nashville not being as bad as other expansion teams and making the playoffs regularly. Their deepest run they got bounced by Arizona didn't they?

He won a cup with Washington and that's great for him and them, but that team was favored to win it all for like a decade straight before he got there. Enough kicks at the can and OV willed them to it. Then on long island he turned an awful but exciting team into a good defensive team that managed to lose twice to Tampa in back to back years and somehow you'd think, hearing them talked about, that they'd won b2b cups, not the lightning.

Trotz would come here and tell a team that already can't score that they need to win every game 1-0. They'd probably manage well enough, but I think I saw that movie enough times with Hank and Torts to know how it ends.

The Islanders went through a pretty weak East too.

Boston was in a downturn, the Pens and Caps are nothing, Carolina hadn't emerged yet.

Now the East is legitimately very good and the Islanders are mid.

 

[chosen]

Rangers have had 11 coaches since they won a Cup. The one thing they all have in common is that a fairly large segment of the fans thought they were all morons.

People rejoice when a coach is replaced and then begin their hatred of the next coach. Some, as soon as they are named, because they know who really should have gotten the job.

My favorite part is that some fans tell us how shit the players are while ALSO telling us how shit the coach is, yet they're incredulous when the Rangers lose a game and look to blame other things. If the players and coach truly suck, you should win about 5 games a year.

When the Rangers win a big game, they played well. When they lose, they played like shit. People who think like that seem to be blissfully unaware that there's another team in the game that impacts the results of the game. Sometimes they'll give some credit to the opposing goalie, though.

But the best thing is that every fanbase page is filled with the exact same thought processes by many of its fans. What a coincidence.

A few here might respond by insulting me and I could already tell you who they'll likely be, because they will recognize themselves as prime exhibits of what I'm talking about because they do nothing but criticize everything about the Rangers. That's all they do.

Even after a Rangers victory, they will somehow work some sort of negative into the conversation, because that's their entire identity. They need to shit on everything. Part of this group believes in tearing the team apart and starting over.

They're clueless that whether this team succeeds or not, it is not in the correct spot for a rebuild. It would be a moronic move. What makes this funnier is that if the Rangers did start a rebuild, now, guaranteed these same fans would say the Rangers are doing it the wrong way. That's just the way they are.

Personnel, injuries, and luck determine Cup winners, not coaches. Coaches can only have short-term effects on a team, but long-terrm, they mean little.

They are more important than baseball managers, though. Those guys are of zero importance to a team's fortunes. It's amazing that they get millions a year. There's also no need to have umpires at all in baseball. They already defer to computers.

If only Rangers management could figure out that their best chance of winning the Cup would be to play Kravtsov by himself for 60 minutes a game. They don't even have to draft any players, anymore.

Of our 3 most recent coaches , AV was the best one by far

Can't imagine Machinehead would agree with this. He posted hundreds of times how bad AV was.

 

[HFsNumber1Heel]

Eh they're doing fine this year given the depth they lost.

So many armchair GMs. Who out there is a better coach?

You can say Trotz but once he installs his system, half the fans would turn on him like 2013 Torts.

 

[huerter]

Rangers have had 11 coaches since they won a Cup. The one thing they all have in common is that a fairly large segment of the fans thought they were all morons.

People rejoice when a coach is replaced and then begin their hatred of the next coach. Some, as soon as they are named, because they know who really should have gotten the job.

My favorite part is that some fans tell us how shit the players are while ALSO telling us how shit the coach is, yet they're incredulous when the Rangers lose a game and look to blame other things. If the players and coach truly suck, you should win about 5 games a year.

When the Rangers win a big game, they played well. When they lose, they played like shit. People who think like that seem to be blissfully unaware that there's another team in the game that impacts the results of the game. Sometimes they'll give some credit to the opposing goalie, though.

But the best thing is that every fanbase page is filled with the exact same thought processes by many of its fans. What a coincidence.

A few here might respond by insulting me and I could already tell you who they'll likely be, because they will recognize themselves as prime exhibits of what I'm talking about because they do nothing but criticize everything about the Rangers. That's all they do.

Even after a Rangers victory, they will somehow work some sort of negative into the conversation, because that's their entire identity. They need to shit on everything. Part of this group believes in tearing the team apart and starting over.

They're clueless that whether this team succeeds or not, it is not in the correct spot for a rebuild. It would be a moronic move. What makes this funnier is that if the Rangers did start a rebuild, now, guaranteed these same fans would say the Rangers are doing it the wrong way. That's just the way they are.

Personnel, injuries, and luck determine Cup winners, not coaches. Coaches can only have short-term effects on a team, but long-terrm, they mean little.

They are more important than baseball managers, though. Those guys are of zero importance to a team's fortunes. It's amazing that they get millions a year. There's also no need to have umpires at all in baseball. They already defer to computers.

If only Rangers management could figure out that their best chance of winning the Cup would be to play Kravtsov by himself for 60 minutes a game. They don't even have to draft any players, anymore.



Can't imagine Machinehead would agree with this. He posted hundreds of times how bad AV was.

My first like ever. God bless you.

 

[Machinehead]

Rangers have had 11 coaches since they won a Cup. The one thing they all have in common is that a fairly large segment of the fans thought they were all morons.

People rejoice when a coach is replaced and then begin their hatred of the next coach. Some, as soon as they are named, because they know who really should have gotten the job.

My favorite part is that some fans tell us how shit the players are while ALSO telling us how shit the coach is, yet they're incredulous when the Rangers lose a game and look to blame other things. If the players and coach truly suck, you should win about 5 games a year.

When the Rangers win a big game, they played well. When they lose, they played like shit. People who think like that seem to be blissfully unaware that there's another team in the game that impacts the results of the game. Sometimes they'll give some credit to the opposing goalie, though.

But the best thing is that every fanbase page is filled with the exact same thought processes by many of its fans. What a coincidence.

A few here might respond by insulting me and I could already tell you who they'll likely be, because they will recognize themselves as prime exhibits of what I'm talking about because they do nothing but criticize everything about the Rangers. That's all they do.

Even after a Rangers victory, they will somehow work some sort of negative into the conversation, because that's their entire identity. They need to shit on everything. Part of this group believes in tearing the team apart and starting over.

They're clueless that whether this team succeeds or not, it is not in the correct spot for a rebuild. It would be a moronic move. What makes this funnier is that if the Rangers did start a rebuild, now, guaranteed these same fans would say the Rangers are doing it the wrong way. That's just the way they are.

Personnel, injuries, and luck determine Cup winners, not coaches. Coaches can only have short-term effects on a team, but long-terrm, they mean little.

They are more important than baseball managers, though. Those guys are of zero importance to a team's fortunes. It's amazing that they get millions a year. There's also no need to have umpires at all in baseball. They already defer to computers.

If only Rangers management could figure out that their best chance of winning the Cup would be to play Kravtsov by himself for 60 minutes a game. They don't even have to draft any players, anymore.



Can't imagine Machinehead would agree with this. He posted hundreds of times how bad AV was.

Yes! I'll stand by disliking AV.

The reason I didn't like AV is because he hurt his own team not being able to ever admit he was wrong. Every coach has favorites that they probably overplay, but AV sheltered his favorites to a comical extent. He gave Glass the easiest usage in the league in 2015 and 2016. If you're tacitly acknowledging that the guy needs to be babied, then admit he's not cutting it and bench him or reduce his minutes. He low-key heavily sheltered Girardi late-tenure as well.

He also blatantly underplayed acquisitions he didn't agree with.

Not to dig up corpses but that's why, and it goes beyond "a different coach would have won the Cup because reasons."

That being said, you're not wrong.

I don't know if I agree that coaches matter as little you believe they do. I think some coaches are better for development while others are better for contenders. In general, different coaches go with different personnel and it kind of depends on who you have.

I understand your overall point. Coaches are scapegoated far too much, and I think the main thing is, they're more similar in hockey than they are in other sports. Hockey is played on a small surface and moves a million miles per hour. It's a reactive/instinctive sport and isn't as tactical as football, soccer, or basketball.

Every GDT somebody will complain we don't have a system. What is a "system?" Forechecking and trying to generate good chances? Every coach does that.

Regardless of what you think a coach is actually capable of, I think we have enough evidence to say that a handful of coaches haven't done anything to change the top things people complain about. How many do we go through before we believe it? Obviously coaching isn't the cause of what people think is wrong, and yet, every single time, the next coach is the guy that's different.

At best they're a mixed bag, and even Cup winning coaches have fanbases out there that shit on them. I thought Torts did a solid job with what he had here but ask Vancouver fans how they feel about him.

Unless it's minutae, a coach is almost never fixing whatever you think needs fixing.

 

[markymarc1215]

This is not an organization that will ever consistently develop forward talent, even if you have the 2OA and 1OA in consecutive years. Even if we took Jack Hughes and Tim Stutzle, they would be a shadow of the players with us that they are currently. Likewise, put Kakko on the Debbies and Laf on the Senators, and they'd be on the 1st line.

I have come to accept this. Aside from the rare "one off year" here and there, this will always be an organization that needs to spend money and will lack the patience to do the right thing up front.

Defenseman and goalies, that is a whole different story. They rarely miss with those picks and prospects.

 

[Machinehead]

This is not an organization that will ever consistently develop forward talent, even if you have the 2OA and 1OA in consecutive years. Even if we took Jack Hughes and Tim Stutzle, they would be a shadow of the players with us that they are currently. Likewise, put Kakko on the Debbies and Laf on the Senators, and they'd be on the 1st line.

I have come to accept this. Aside from the rare "one off year" here and there, this will always be an organization that needs to spend money and will lack the patience to do the right thing up front.

Defenseman and goalies, that is a whole different story. They rarely miss with those picks and prospects.

The problem I have is that the front office really hasn't changed as much as people seem to think it has.

People complain about coaching as it is. Imagine the reaction if AV was Torts' assistant, Quinn was AV's assistant, and Gallant was Quinn's assistant.

People sure as hell wouldn't think it's a different staff but somehow the executives are.

The front office are the people setting the expectations and putting all the infrastructure in place for development.

You can say it's just not a thing and the poor unlucky Rangers got back to back 2OA and 1OA picks that 100% of scouts violently whiffed on. I don't agree with that and at the very least, I think it's worth exploring if improvement is possible.

 

[markymarc1215]

The problem I have is that the front office really hasn't changed as much as people seem to think it has.

People complain about coaching as it is. Imagine the reaction if AV was Torts' assistant, Quinn was AV's assistant, and Gallant was Quinn's assistant.

People sure as hell wouldn't think it's a different staff but somehow the executives are.

The front office are the people setting the expectations and putting all the infrastructure in place for development.

You can say it's just not a thing and the poor unlucky Rangers got back to back 2OA and 1OA
picks that 100% of scouts violently whiffed on. I don't agree with that and at the very least, I think it's worth exploring if improvement is possible.

Exactly. Sather's tentacles run very deep and extend beyond any reach we will ever know. Nepotism at its finest, just like the Flyers. Hiring him was the absolute worst decision in this team's recent history. The fact that he got his ass handed to him on every single purge day trade should have been enough to get him fired. I remember going to the Garden and the eruption of Fire Sather! chants from 2002-2004.

He is the pinnacle of the "Good Ole Boys Club" and the architect behind the entitlement. He let Messier play GM during his last 4 seasons here, 3 of which were pretty mailed in.

It may be Drury, Gallant, etc, but they were all hired with Sather's encouragement. I had some faith with JD and Gorton, but that obviously is long gone now. Not surprised Gorton is building a strong foundation with the Habs.

 

[Rangerboy030]

The problem I have is that the front office really hasn't changed as much as people seem to think it has.

People complain about coaching as it is. Imagine the reaction if AV was Torts' assistant, Quinn was AV's assistant, and Gallant was Quinn's assistant.

People sure as hell wouldn't think it's a different staff but somehow the executives are.

The front office are the people setting the expectations and putting all the infrastructure in place for development.

You can say it's just not a thing and the poor unlucky Rangers got back to back 2OA and 1OA picks that 100% of scouts violently whiffed on. I don't agree with that and at the very least, I think it's worth exploring if improvement is possible.

And now imagine that Torts was still part of the organisation as a "senior advisor".

 

[Machinehead]

Exactly. Sather's tentacles run very deep and extend beyond any reach we will ever know. Nepotism at its finest, just like the Flyers. Hiring him was the absolute worst decision in this team's recent history. The fact that he got his ass handed to him on every single purge day trade should have been enough to get him fired. I remember going to the Garden and the eruption of Fire Sather! chants from 2002-2004.

He is the pinnacle of the "Good Ole Boys Club" and the architect behind the entitlement. He let Messier play GM during his last 4 seasons here, 3 of which were pretty mailed in.

It may be Drury, Gallant, etc, but they were all hired with Sather's encouragement. I had some faith with JD and Gorton, but that obviously is long gone now. Not surprised Gorton is building a strong foundation with the Habs.

Gorton was far from perfect but it's obvious that he wasn't toeing the line when the purge happened, and we don't really know exactly what the tipping point was.

When Sather was a successful executive (and coach) in this league, he had five top guys and everyone else just made sure they didn't get jumped. We're trying to do things the same way. The group of vets run the show and everyone else is expected to just not do anything stupid.

It makes going from out of the group of stars to in the group of stars (you know, development) virtually impossible.

 

[markymarc1215]

Gorton was far from perfect but it's obvious that he wasn't toeing the line when the purge happened, and we don't really know exactly what the tipping point was.

When Sather was a successful executive (and coach) in this league, he had five top guys and everyone else just made sure they didn't get jumped. We're trying to do things the same way. The group of vets run the show and everyone else is expected to just not do anything stupid.

It makes going from out of the group of stars to in the group of stars (you know, development) virtually impossible.

Its as if this club is run by the people.who work at Rangers twitter. Just a bunch of fanbois with zero substance or objectivity.

By all accounts, Chris Drury was a bust as a player for us. Why not make him a GM? Anyone with half a brain doesnt make such an awful trade as the Buch trade.

 

[GENESISPuck94]

Boudreau story is crazy. Rangers should fire Gallant and hire Boudreau. I bet no one at the Garden will chant something for Gallant.

 

[GENESISPuck94]

The problem I have is that the front office really hasn't changed as much as people seem to think it has.

People complain about coaching as it is. Imagine the reaction if AV was Torts' assistant, Quinn was AV's assistant, and Gallant was Quinn's assistant.

People sure as hell wouldn't think it's a different staff but somehow the executives are.

The front office are the people setting the expectations and putting all the infrastructure in place for development.

You can say it's just not a thing and the poor unlucky Rangers got back to back 2OA and 1OA picks that 100% of scouts violently whiffed on. I don't agree with that and at the very least, I think it's worth exploring if improvement is possible.

Facts.

The entire Rangers organization is flawed. It's because Sather won't just f*** off to Banf already. He's like Emperor Palpatine pulling the strings from behind a curtain while the blame lands on Anakin/Vader (GMs and coaches). Sather is like a shadow government running his old boys club. How long until Messier ends up in a position of power with the Rangers? You just know that's going to happen eventually.

I would trust people on these boards to run the Rangers more than the idiots actually running the organization. At least people here have an outside point of view and have brains.

Drury has to be the most milquetoast person I've ever seen. It's hard to tell the guy is alive. It's no wonder he gets raked in every trade and decision he makes. Complete beta.

I'd blame Dolan, but a lot of the time he doesn't even pay attention to the Rangers.

 

[Deleted member 23124]

I'd blame Dolan, but a lot of the time he doesn't even pay attention to the Rangers.

I don't see why not....he sanctions everything Sather does. I don't think The Dolt really cares if we win a Cup or not....as long as we make the playoffs and the money keeps rolling in, he's content to turn a blind eye.

And I think he does pay attention (for the above reason) -- he just keeps quiet about it.

 

[GENESISPuck94]

Rangers have had 11 coaches since they won a Cup. The one thing they all have in common is that a fairly large segment of the fans thought they were all morons.

People rejoice when a coach is replaced and then begin their hatred of the next coach. Some, as soon as they are named, because they know who really should have gotten the job.

My favorite part is that some fans tell us how shit the players are while ALSO telling us how shit the coach is, yet they're incredulous when the Rangers lose a game and look to blame other things. If the players and coach truly suck, you should win about 5 games a year.

When the Rangers win a big game, they played well. When they lose, they played like shit. People who think like that seem to be blissfully unaware that there's another team in the game that impacts the results of the game. Sometimes they'll give some credit to the opposing goalie, though.

But the best thing is that every fanbase page is filled with the exact same thought processes by many of its fans. What a coincidence.

A few here might respond by insulting me and I could already tell you who they'll likely be, because they will recognize themselves as prime exhibits of what I'm talking about because they do nothing but criticize everything about the Rangers. That's all they do.

Even after a Rangers victory, they will somehow work some sort of negative into the conversation, because that's their entire identity. They need to shit on everything. Part of this group believes in tearing the team apart and starting over.

They're clueless that whether this team succeeds or not, it is not in the correct spot for a rebuild. It would be a moronic move. What makes this funnier is that if the Rangers did start a rebuild, now, guaranteed these same fans would say the Rangers are doing it the wrong way. That's just the way they are.

Personnel, injuries, and luck determine Cup winners, not coaches. Coaches can only have short-term effects on a team, but long-terrm, they mean little.

They are more important than baseball managers, though. Those guys are of zero importance to a team's fortunes. It's amazing that they get millions a year. There's also no need to have umpires at all in baseball. They already defer to computers.

If only Rangers management could figure out that their best chance of winning the Cup would be to play Kravtsov by himself for 60 minutes a game. They don't even have to draft any players, anymore.



Can't imagine Machinehead would agree with this. He posted hundreds of times how bad AV was.

Two coaches I actually loved here despite what others will say: Renney and Tortorella. I also liked their staffs. And Sullivan should have been kept around after Tortorella was fired. I thought it was a mistake when both Renney and Tortorella were fired. Especially Tortorella.

I haven't liked a Rangers coach since. Say what you will about both Renney and Tortorella but they both got A LOT out of the teams they had. And at least demanded some accountability. Especially Renney in the first year or two. If it wasn't for Crosby diving and that f*** face Drury, Renney and Jagr could've gotten us to the Final. If Tortorella had at least one player that could score goals (that lazy glass man Gaborik does't count) he may have gotten them to the Cup Final.

Vigneault, Quinn, and Gallant drove/drive me up a freaking wall every game. Vigneault had a fast as hell team that he mysteriously made turtle all the freaking time. Quinn was in over his head. Gallant is the most idiotic coach I've seen since I've been old enough to pay attention to who's coaching the team. Obviously liked Kenan for us winning the Cup but that group of Hall of Famers could have won with or without him.

I was a kid/teenager in the 90s I didn't care who was coaching really. It wasn't like it is now with social media and internet message boards. We watched on TV and read Hockey News when we could. Now with all the info and video and access to everything it's easy to see how a coach is and handles a team. Gallant is up there with my least favorite coaches not just Rangers but in NY sports of the last couple decades. I liked Art Howe more than Gallant....

 

[GENESISPuck94]

I don't see why not....he sanctions everything Sather does. I don't think The Dolt really cares if we win a Cup or not....as long as we make the playoffs and the money keeps rolling in, he's content to turn a blind eye.

And I think he does pay attention (for the above reason) -- he just keeps quiet about it.

Good points. And there's nothing that can be done about it. He owns the team. So we are stuck with him.