Fire AV, Fire Sather. This is a bad hockey team.

[GordonGecko]

The feeling around here reminds me of a saying from a hall of fame football coach. He said something like after a early season loss we are thinking how the heck are we ever going to win a single game and after a early season win we are thinking we cant be beat.

I'm more concerned with the sorry state of the Rangers fan base than the team itself on a 9 game road trip under a new coach.

 

[scs15]

I'm more concerned with the sorry state of the Rangers fan base than the team itself on a 9 game road trip under a new coach.

Exactly.

 

[Crazed Beaver]

I'm concerned about the head burried in sand epidemic.

 

[Beef Invictus]

Give it a few games. AV isn't THIS bad, and neither is the talent on the team. I think.

 

[NYR Viper]

Give it a few games. AV isn't THIS bad, and neither is the talent on the team. I think.

I'm not sure about the latter...

 

[Beef Invictus]

I'm not sure about the latter...

Yeah I don't wanna say that definitively, since I've been saying the same thing about Carolina and it isn't working out. Maybe I'm not wrong this time?

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

I smell an Avery-esque circa 2007 move coming on. Knowing Sather, he will ignore the deep fissures of his roster creation and insist the team just needs a spark.

Dorsett is not the answer. He was an idiot on skates last night trying to stir the team up.

 

[Bluenote13]

I smell an Avery-esque circa 2007 move coming on. Knowing Sather, he will ignore the deep fissures of his roster creation and insist the team just needs a spark.

Dorsett is not the answer. He was an idiot on skates last night trying to stir the team up.

I was thinking getting Martin Rucinsky out of retirement.

Sather: "He adds that extra element upfront, a finisher and leader who can skate and go to the net...."

 

[nyranger61494]

I was thinking getting Martin Rucinsky out of retirement.

Sather: "He adds that extra element upfront, a finisher and leader who can skate and go to the net...."

LOL.

Bluenote, where do you think the team stands? What do you see going forward? I take it based on your other comments that as it stands, seeing the team for what it really is in this system will yield positives?

 

[GAGLine]

I'm not sure about the latter...

This team is as talented, or moreso, than the team we had last year. It's mostly the same players.

The problem is execution. Right now, the team is unable to effectively execute AV's system. The question is, will the players adapt, or does AV need to change his system to better fit the players? And how long do we wait for the former before implementing the latter?

 

[Bluenote13]

LOL.

Bluenote, where do you think the team stands? What do you see going forward? I take it based on your other comments that as it stands, seeing the team for what it really is in this system will yield positives?

I said it when Torts was fired. Even though I wasn't a huge Torts fan, the team was bound to take a step back, not forward.

The real issue is the same thing I've been railing about for years on here - where is the talent?? Plenty of 'serviceable' players go through the doors at Msg but the game is played with the puck on your stick just as much as it is keeping it out of your goal, and we don't have enough guys who can hold the puck and put fear into other clubs. They will come at us cause they don't fear getting beat through the neutral zone. Our players constantly hand off the puck 'here you take it!'.

Nash is not the guy to do it all himself, thats asking too much of any one player. Richards was a mistake, he does not carry and create, I'm not sure what he'll be over a full season. We spent so many assets on these two yet they have no one who will hold the puck long enough for them to utilize what they bring to the table.

Poor drafting. If just a few of our picks over the years helped ration out the offensive burden then we wouldn't constantly be looking to blame a handful of players on what is an organizational failure.

 

[Ryan McDonut]

good to see nobody's overreacting yet

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

I said it when Torts was fired. Even though I wasn't a huge Torts fan, the team was bound to take a step back, not forward.

The real issue is the same thing I've been railing about for years on here - where is the talent?? Plenty of 'serviceable' players go through the doors at Msg but the game is played with the puck on your stick just as much as it is keeping it out of your goal, and we don't have enough guys who can hold the puck and put fear into other clubs. They will come at us cause they don't fear getting beat through the neutral zone. Our players constantly hand off the puck 'here you take it!'.

Nash is not the guy to do it all himself, thats asking too much of any one player. Richards was a mistake, he does not carry and create, I'm not sure what he'll be over a full season. We spent so many assets on these two yet they have no one who will hold the puck long enough for them to utilize what they bring to the table.

Poor drafting. If just a few of our picks over the years helped ration out the offensive burden then we wouldn't constantly be looking to blame a handful of players on what is an organizational failure.

Youve hit on problem #1A in my opinion.

1B, as far as Im concerned, is a similar inability to cultivate bottom 6 talent. Its a revolving door of importing answers to the top line and the bottom 6 and, surprise, very rarely do any of them work out.

The drafting leaves something to be desired - in the cases where its successful, it seems to be creating redundant types of players.

 

[TankLarkin]

time to begin rebuilding but not with Sather. Core players: 24, 21, 27, 30.

Coming down for opening night. Should be fun at MSG, but not in a good way. Imagine the introductions if they keep playing like this through October. Ouch.

 

[Championship*]

time to begin rebuilding but not with Sather. Core players: 24, 21, 27, 30.

Coming down for opening night. Should be fun at MSG, but not in a good way. Imagine the introductions if they keep playing like this through October. Ouch.

Sorry, but you cannot rebuild with #30 on the roster. Impossible.

 

[nyranger61494]

I said it when Torts was fired. Even though I wasn't a huge Torts fan, the team was bound to take a step back, not forward.

The real issue is the same thing I've been railing about for years on here - where is the talent?? Plenty of 'serviceable' players go through the doors at Msg but the game is played with the puck on your stick just as much as it is keeping it out of your goal, and we don't have enough guys who can hold the puck and put fear into other clubs. They will come at us cause they don't fear getting beat through the neutral zone. Our players constantly hand off the puck 'here you take it!'.

Nash is not the guy to do it all himself, thats asking too much of any one player. Richards was a mistake, he does not carry and create, I'm not sure what he'll be over a full season. We spent so many assets on these two yet they have no one who will hold the puck long enough for them to utilize what they bring to the table.

Poor drafting. If just a few of our picks over the years helped ration out the offensive burden then we wouldn't constantly be looking to blame a handful of players on what is an organizational failure.

Thanks for the knowledge. Some great points.

 

[Doctor King Schultz]

Listening to hank's post game interview, he sounded like he wanted out of New York last week. This is his last season as a New York Ranger.

Of course time will tell, but in my gut I'm starting to feel like he is walking after this season. He wants nothing more than to win a championship at this point in his career.Yes, he hasn't been great so far this season, but everyone knows he will be back to his regular self soon. We can't say that about the rest of the team, and he knows that. The Rangers have played in such a way that if Hank has a bad game, it is a guaranteed loss. While that may seem true for most teams, there are teams out there that can give up 3 goals and still win the game.

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

Youve hit on problem #1A in my opinion.

1B, as far as Im concerned, is a similar inability to cultivate bottom 6 talent. Its a revolving door of importing answers to the top line and the bottom 6 and, surprise, very rarely do any of them work out.

The drafting leaves something to be desired - in the cases where its successful, it seems to be creating redundant types of players.

I think that 1A is still the lack of organizational philosophy. There doesn't seem to be any consensus of what kind of team the powers that be want this team to be. All we hear is any season that doesn't end with a Cup win is a failure. A nice sound bight but one that seemingly the GMs own standard doesn't have to answer to.

I liken it to building a brand. Once you create yourbrand, everything filters down through from there—the coach you higher, the players you draft, which FAs you target and what players you want to trade for and what you're willing to give up that kind of player. You build a farm system around that brand.

Once you build that brand/create that organizational philosophy, your (and Bluenote's) 1A and !B come out of that.

 

[gravey9]

You don't lose this bad in 3 out of 4 games if players are busting their *****. You just don't. I'm starting to wonder if half the locker room or more didnt' want to see Torts go. And a smaller section - the Nash's, Richards and Del Zotto's of the world wanted Torts gone. Somehow they won out and now there is a growing division in the room. It would explain why players, SO EARLY IN THE SEASON, don't seem to have each other's backs the way they should. No one stands up for Nash two games ago? No one goes after the guys crashing over lundquist? No one???? There is an element in the room that is causing this team to not come together and play for each other. The system cannot possibly be that bad.

 

[Clown Fiesta]

You don't lose this bad in 3 out of 4 games if players are busting their *****. You just don't. I'm starting to wonder if half the locker room or more didnt' want to see Torts go. And a smaller section - the Nash's, Richards and Del Zotto's of the world wanted Torts gone. Somehow they won out and now there is a growing division in the room. It would explain why players, SO EARLY IN THE SEASON, don't seem to have each other's backs the way they should. No one stands up for Nash two games ago? No one goes after the guys crashing over lundquist? No one???? There is an element in the room that is causing this team to not come together and play for each other. The system cannot possibly be that bad.

They didn't stand up for each other when Torts was here outside of one or two times I can recall, so I don't agree with this.

Remember when Lundqvist had to take matters into his own hands with Max Pac?

 

[thepuckmonster]

Unlike the other Canucks fans who've come in here to gloat, I wanted to maybe elaborate a little bit on AV's philosophy and system strategy as a hope to quell your worries.

Vigneault is a brilliant tactician who took zone start utilization and really brought it to the forefront of NHL strategizing in 2009-10. This is still an effective and highly successful theory, and not the issue you guys are having with him.

What's going on is this: Vigneault has been known in Vancouver has having one of the most difficult systems (especially for defensemen) in the league. Now, I know you've heard this umpteen million times, but no one really has explained why. The reason it takes players so long to learn is because it is heavily reliant on decision making.

Consider it like this: if the D-man is skating in, he makes his decision based on 1) what type of players are around him (are they forechecking forwards? defensemen?) 2) the handedness of the player (does he shoot right or left?) and 3) position of his teammates. For players who have become accustomed to playing a more one-dimensional and simple system (much like Torts'), this is incredibly difficult to adjust to. We would have to allow a grace period of 2-3 months for new players to adapt. But, once they do become comfortable playing it, it's incredibly effective. However, the issue is when you don't have high IQ (but high talent) defensemen in your group. This is ultimately what doomed Ballard in Vancouver: as a puck rushing D man, he relied on instinct over decision making.

Also: AV's system relies heavily on stretch passes and strong outlet passes from the defense. This really elevated Vancouver to elite status by having a good chunk of secondary scoring come from the D. It ended up being neutralized in the end because the West plays so much tighter than the East. This aspect will really benefit the Rangers once their passing is cleaned up. They will have to space to make these plays.

Lastly, the only retractor I really have to say about Alain is, in the end, he played his team like he wanted them to play, not how they were built to. Gillis took a lot of flack for not providing him the tools he needed, and rightly so, but it is a two way street. Sather must make moves to acquire more skill players for your forward group and another defenseman with higher offensive capabilities. Gillis did do that with Garrison (booming shot) and Booth (injury prone) but unfortunately two 1st round exits don't allot you the leash to get another pass.

In the end you guys will be fine. You may have to struggle this year, but as long as you retain Hank and acquire some more skill you will be a force to be reckoned with. Don't let the AV Biased Canucks fans tell you otherwise, there is always a risk to a higher reward and it will be worth it.

 

[TankLarkin]

Give it a few games. AV isn't THIS bad, and neither is the talent on the team. I think.

yes, perhaps by November we'll only be losing by 3 goals a game and Del Zotto will look like an average OHL defenseman.

 

[StepansLabyrinth]

Awesome post, thepuckmonster.

 

[Ail]

I think that 1A is still the lack of organizational philosophy. There doesn't seem to be any consensus of what kind of team the powers that be want this team to be. All we hear is any season that doesn't end with a Cup win is a failure. A nice sound bight but one that seemingly the GMs own standard doesn't have to answer to.

I liken it to building a brand. Once you create yourbrand, everything filters down through from there—the coach you higher, the players you draft, which FAs you target and what players you want to trade for and what you're willing to give up that kind of player. You build a farm system around that brand.

Once you build that brand/create that organizational philosophy, your (and Bluenote's) 1A and !B come out of that.

If this is true then by all accounts the Rangers are a success. To me it appears that the philosophy is to line Dolan's pockets, which Sather and his mediocrity have done incredibly well. Again, I don't think they care as much about winning as we give them credit for.

 

[OverTheCap]

Unlike the other Canucks fans who've come in here to gloat, I wanted to maybe elaborate a little bit on AV's philosophy and system strategy as a hope to quell your worries.

Vigneault is a brilliant tactician who took zone start utilization and really brought it to the forefront of NHL strategizing in 2009-10. This is still an effective and highly successful theory, and not the issue you guys are having with him.

What's going on is this: Vigneault has been known in Vancouver has having one of the most difficult systems (especially for defensemen) in the league. Now, I know you've heard this umpteen million times, but no one really has explained why. The reason it takes players so long to learn is because it is heavily reliant on decision making.

Consider it like this: if the D-man is skating in, he makes his decision based on 1) what type of players are around him (are they forechecking forwards? defensemen?) 2) the handedness of the player (does he shoot right or left?) and 3) position of his teammates. For players who have become accustomed to playing a more one-dimensional and simple system (much like Torts'), this is incredibly difficult to adjust to. We would have to allow a grace period of 2-3 months for new players to adapt. But, once they do become comfortable playing it, it's incredibly effective. However, the issue is when you don't have high IQ (but high talent) defensemen in your group. This is ultimately what doomed Ballard in Vancouver: as a puck rushing D man, he relied on instinct over decision making.

Also: AV's system relies heavily on stretch passes and strong outlet passes from the defense. This really elevated Vancouver to elite status by having a good chunk of secondary scoring come from the D. It ended up being neutralized in the end because the West plays so much tighter than the East. This aspect will really benefit the Rangers once their passing is cleaned up. They will have to space to make these plays.

Lastly, the only retractor I really have to say about Alain is, in the end, he played his team like he wanted them to play, not how they were built to. Gillis took a lot of flack for not providing him the tools he needed, and rightly so, but it is a two way street. Sather must make moves to acquire more skill players for your forward group and another defenseman with higher offensive capabilities. Gillis did do that with Garrison (booming shot) and Booth (injury prone) but unfortunately two 1st round exits don't allot you the leash to get another pass.

In the end you guys will be fine. You may have to struggle this year, but as long as you retain Hank and acquire some more skill you will be a force to be reckoned with. Don't let the AV Biased Canucks fans tell you otherwise, there is always a risk to a higher reward and it will be worth it.

Thanks for the insight. And you are most certainly right that Sather has to acquire more skill players for AV's system to work effectively.

Unfortunately, if the defensemen are required to be good decision-makers with high hockey IQ, I am unsure if if they will able to adapt. Staal and McDonagh can probably hack it. Girardi and Del Zotto are doomed.