Player Discussion Gerard Gallant

Status
Not open for further replies.
You know- if you are not pretty happy now with this Ranger team and the likelihood they will be competitive and perhaps cup contenders/winners for the foreseeable future then I’m simply not sure when you ever will. To suggest the coach be fired when the team has played incredibly well for several months now is pathetic. Try and not let emotional responses enter into your view of a really good team. You just lose all credibility.
I think gallant isn't a bad coach overall, but his over reliance on the vets in the middle of the season has sort of led to this issue right now, where the kids are the only line thriving, and the vets have gone cold,
and gallant isnt feeding the kids more ice time or PP time.
Instead of being comfortable riding the hot hand, he's forcing the vets more ice time because thats the only thing he's comfortable with.

As its been said before, he's here to win games. The problem is that he was a little short sighted.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vaheh
The thing that bothers me about Gallant is he should be shuffling the lines when it is obvious the team isn't scoring. He seems fixated on this top 6 bottom 6 crap like it is set in stone. He really needs to drop that mindset and open it up. Now is the time to experiment with lines but he seems to not get it.
 
The thing that bothers me about Gallant is he should be shuffling the lines when it is obvious the team isn't scoring. He seems fixated on this top 6 bottom 6 crap like it is set in stone. He really needs to drop that mindset and open it up. Now is the time to experiment with lines but he seems to not get it.
If you mean not feeding the kids more ice time and PP time when they're running hot, yeah.
Its a continued discussion topic.
The kids should be closer to 17 minutes this season instead of 15.
 
If you mean not feeding the kids more ice time and PP time when they're running hot, yeah.
Its a continued discussion topic.
The kids should be closer to 17 minutes this season instead of 15.

I am talking about going with a top 9 forward approach and mixing the kids and vets. I mean you can always put them back to the current set up if doesn't work. The time to tinker with lines is now cuz there is little else to play for. But Gallant seems hardwired into this top 6 bottom 6 approach so I would not bet on it happening. Old school thinking basically.
 
Gallants issue isn't line combos, it's his old school mentality where there is no puck support, no defensive pressure in the neutral zone or blue line, and lackluster coverage in the d-zone. It's the gameplan and strategy that's the problem.
I wonder though. Those same problems existed while Quinn was coaching as well. Maybe it's not so much the coach but the personnel that is incapable of doing it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: NickyFotiu
If you mean not feeding the kids more ice time and PP time when they're running hot, yeah.
Its a continued discussion topic.
The kids should be closer to 17 minutes this season instead of 15.
chytil sure. kaako ehh maybe. laffy no - he's just fine with his allotment of 13-15 min. you really don't want to overexpose this guy with over 16 minutes on the ice.
 
chytil sure. kaako ehh maybe. laffy no - he's just fine with his allotment of 13-15 min. you really don't want to overexpose this guy with over 16 minutes on the ice.
The point of giving them time, is to let them make mistakes, and then get better.

This is the point most people have been saying since we had quinn as the coach. Look at stutzle and hughes.
Both had terrible rookie years. Hughes took 3 years.
Laf has flashes, but he doesn't get enough consistent time to really put it all together.
 
The point of giving them time, is to let them make mistakes, and then get better.

This is the point most people have been saying since we had quinn as the coach. Look at stutzle and hughes.
Both had terrible rookie years. Hughes took 3 years.
Laf has flashes, but he doesn't get enough consistent time to really put it all together.
Yes the difference in Hughes and Laf is playing time. Ditto McDavid and Chytil

😂
 
  • Haha
Reactions: SnowblindNYR
Yes the difference in Hughes and Laf is playing time. Ditto McDavid and Chytil

😂
We really don't know do we... Hughes got fed 19 minutes a game including pp1 time since his rookie year.
It took time but eventually hughes figured it out.

Talent is obviously a piece of it, but not getting sat for mistakes, and being willing to take chances and use creativity is a legit development strategy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: yrrebbor
ok. i'll take this part back. instead of 15 make it 16 mins. the kid has had the most success playing less than 17 minutes. but if you take about 3 minutes of time to look up his stats in games he played 17 minutes or more are you honestly going to tell me based on that he deserves those 17 or more?

but overall i will say that the kid has improved a bit this year. especially the last couple of months.
 
The thing that bothers me about Gallant is he should be shuffling the lines when it is obvious the team isn't scoring. He seems fixated on this top 6 bottom 6 crap like it is set in stone. He really needs to drop that mindset and open it up. Now is the time to experiment with lines but he seems to not get it.
As I think about how to say this more, my biggest complaint is HOW he shuffles lines, not that he shuffles lines. All coaches will shuffle lines to some degree, and sometimes it's as much about sending a message than actually believing a particular combo will work.

Panarin Zibanejad Tarasenko and Kreider Trocheck Kane are good lines.

When they come out flat, and the coach feels the need to shuffle it up, however, he always reverts back to combinations he's tried before that don't work.

Panarin Trocheck Kane - no chemistry. Neither Kane nor Panarin really wants to shoot. Neither Panarin nor Kane is consistently capable of zone entries without a speedier player who can utilize them. Both Kane and Panarin prefer to work with linemates who will carry in, drop off to them high in the offensive zone, then continue towards the net to create space. They both love to post up at the top of the circle and either look for a cross ice pass or the trailing weak side D coming in from the point. Trocheck is good at zone entries, but prefers to carry deep, and since he plays more of a grinding north/south style, IF he drops the puck off to someone he's not going to immediately get in a scoring area, he's going to go behind the net in anticipation of keeping the cycle going. Whenever these three are on the ice, you will inevitably find no one open in a scoring area - the only one who will go to a scoring area is Trocheck, and when he does he'll be covered. This line combination should never happen, but yet it's one of GG's defaults with these players.

Kreider Zibanejad Tarasenko - also no chemistry at even strength. Kreider and Zibanejad work together on the PK because they can use their speed to disrupt plays and counter attack off the rush. At even strength, however, this combination simply does not work because it takes the team's two best shooters (93/91) and puts them with arguably the team's worst assist man in the top 9. This results in Tarasenko doing the wall work, Zibanejad not really having a role at even strength, and Kreider screening the goalie/helping cycle but never putting 91 or 93 in a shooting position when he makes a pass to one of them.

I find it ironic that whenever GG starts screwing with the lines, the lines that usually score in that game are the ones he's left alone - happened again in Buffalo.

Also in the last week or so, the D pair usage has been really questionable. It's obvious that Harpur Schneider should only be on the ice when Kreider/Trocheck/Kane or the 4th line are on the ice. It makes no sense to pair them with the kid line where the kids will cycle for 40 seconds, the puck will make it to the point, and one of them will kill the shift by floating a muffin at the net that's either gloved for a faceoff, or blocked and immediately cleared. They also should not be playing with the top line generally because they simply don't help them create. For a gritty fourth line, or a second line that has Kreider and Trocheck presumably buzzing around the net, I don't mind their limpdick wristers, but not when it destroys possession or wastes 40 seconds of sustained pressure and the opportunity to create against a tired group of defenders. Kid line as good as they are forechecking are not nearly as good in their own zone, and I think saddling them with two of the worst Dmen among playoff teams in zone exits is far from a good idea.

Finally I think my thoughts about the PP are well documented at this point. The PP was killing it with Zibanejad in the bumper, Panarin on the left side, Tarasenko on the right, Fox at the point, and Kreider in front of the net until the coaching staff decided to force feed Kane onto PP1, and inexplicably change the PP setup altogether. Meanwhile, PP2 would benefit immensely from Kane's playmaking abilities.
 
Last edited:
We really don't know do we... Hughes got fed 19 minutes a game including pp1 time since his rookie year.
It took time but eventually hughes figured it out.

Talent is obviously a piece of it, but not getting sat for mistakes, and being willing to take chances and use creativity is a legit development strategy.
Coaching addresses mistakes. It doesn't ignore them. Guys can score in their first 16 minutes in a game just as easily as they can in the last 3 extra minutes if they play 19 minutes. Hughes is a totally different player than Laf. That isn't putting Laf down. Its just being real. Their skill sets are totally different. Forget Hughes. We never had a chance at him so why compare them? If we gave Kakko or Krav 19 minutes a game they would not be Laf, Hughes, or McDavid. They may or may not progress faster but it wouldn't change their makeups as players. Laf may become a really good player. He is still very young. Guys improve at different paces. Laf will never be a Hughes style of player though. Its apples and oranges.
 
I think gallant isn't a bad coach overall, but his over reliance on the vets in the middle of the season has sort of led to this issue right now, where the kids are the only line thriving, and the vets have gone cold,
and gallant isnt feeding the kids more ice time or PP time.
Instead of being comfortable riding the hot hand, he's forcing the vets more ice time because thats the only thing he's comfortable with.

As its been said before, he's here to win games. The problem is that he was a little short sighted.
Nope- the vets know these games are basically tune ups for the playoffs and are treating them like that. Also, Mica and crew have consistently been producing so I’m not sure what you are even talking about.
 
ok. i'll take this part back. instead of 15 make it 16 mins. the kid has had the most success playing less than 17 minutes. but if you take about 3 minutes of time to look up his stats in games he played 17 minutes or more are you honestly going to tell me based on that he deserves those 17 or more?

but overall i will say that the kid has improved a bit this year. especially the last couple of months.
So he jumps from 13 minutes a game to 15, and you see improvement, in a consensus first overall pick, but you say lets not give him another 4 minutes a game...
40 points with almost 0 consistent pp time is not a poor season.
Kirby Dach on MTL went from 26 points in 70 games in 18 minutes a game
to 38 points in 58 games, and people talk about how he made the next step.

Laf has never averaged 16 minutes a game. Laf was the consensus FIRST overall.

We've talked about this until we're blue in the face, but almost every team that gets a 1st overall, they jump right in, straight into the top 6, or first line, and they stay there.
Laf has never had consistent top 6 time, nor top 6 linemates. The kid line has been his most consistent linemates this season, and they dont get 18 minutes.
he doesn't get consistent powerplay time, to work and gain confidence with the extra space.

He's currently 3rd on the depth chart.

And yes right now this is a fantastic problem to have. But anyone who says "oh dont give him more time" is making a really weak argument.
 
So he jumps from 13 minutes a game to 15, and you see improvement, in a consensus first overall pick, but you say lets not give him another 4 minutes a game...
40 points with almost 0 consistent pp time is not a poor season.
Kirby Dach on MTL went from 26 points in 70 games in 18 minutes a game
to 38 points in 58 games, and people talk about how he made the next step.

Laf has never averaged 16 minutes a game. Laf was the consensus FIRST overall.

We've talked about this until we're blue in the face, but almost every team that gets a 1st overall, they jump right in, straight into the top 6, or first line, and they stay there.
Laf has never had consistent top 6 time, nor top 6 linemates. The kid line has been his most consistent linemates this season, and they dont get 18 minutes.
he doesn't get consistent powerplay time, to work and gain confidence with the extra space.

He's currently 3rd on the depth chart.

And yes right now this is a fantastic problem to have. But anyone who says "oh dont give him more time" is making a really weak argument.
Will the rate of points produced by Laf and KK go up significantly in minutes 16-17-18 over the minutes they play 1-15? If they produced more in minutes 1-15 don't you think they would get more minutes? I'm not bashing them. I think they are getting minutes based on their play. When they play better it increases. If they killed penalties it would also increase. They might later in their careers. Its not personal. Coaches want their best players on the ice. Laf and KK play as much as Taresenko.
 
Will the rate of points produced by Laf and KK go up significantly in minutes 16-17-18 over the minutes they play 1-15? If they produced more in minutes 1-15 don't you think they would get more minutes? I'm not bashing them. I think they are getting minutes based on their play. When they play better it increases. If they killed penalties it would also increase. They might later in their careers. Its not personal. Coaches want their best players on the ice. Laf and KK play as much as Taresenko.

Heres the thing. That argument is flawed.
Look at the even strength production/60 of hughes in his first 3 years.
Laf was actually out producing him in the first 2 years.
He didnt earn anything, but they fed him minutes and he got better.

Yes I think if you feed kids who are high draft picks ( who arent actual busts or reaches) minutes, especially PP minutes, their game takes steps. They get the opportunity to learn and try and do things without worrying about making the unsafe play.

Thats what you want your 1OA pick to do. Make the unsafe play, and make it again and again until you can make defenders look foolish.
 
Heres the thing. That argument is flawed.
Look at the even strength production/60 of hughes in his first 3 years.
Laf was actually out producing him in the first 2 years.
He didnt earn anything, but they fed him minutes and he got better.

Yes I think if you feed kids who are high draft picks ( who arent actual busts or reaches) minutes, especially PP minutes, their game takes steps. They get the opportunity to learn and try and do things without worrying about making the unsafe play.

Thats what you want your 1OA pick to do. Make the unsafe play, and make it again and again until you can make defenders look foolish.
I don't know any coach that encourages unsafe play. Maybe to take some chances but unsafe? I don't know. Lets say they encourage unsafe play for discussion sake. Why cant they make your unsafe plays in minutes 1-15 instead of minutes 16-17-18? By the way plenty of players have been discouraged in the nhl when thrown in the deep end before they could swim. Force feeding them in to losing negative play is not a great way to build their confidence.
 
I don't know any coach that encourages unsafe play. Maybe to take some chances but unsafe? I don't know. Lets say they encourage unsafe play for discussion sake. Why cant they make your unsafe plays in minutes 1-15 instead of minutes 16-17-18? By the way plenty of players have been discouraged in the nhl when thrown in the deep end before they could swim. Force feeding them in to losing negative play is not a great way to build their confidence.
Its about not being punished for making mistakes. If you're getting 13 minutes a night, and you have to play perfectly to get 15, you're not going to try moves. If you're getting 18 minutes including PP time, you'll try something knowing you're gona get back on the ice.

Early in the season Kakko tried a move, lost the puck and gave up a goal. He was then benched for a shift.
He then later went out and scored a goal.
Its about knowing you're going to be given the opportunity to keep going so you keep trying.

Safe and boring play isn't what gets someone drafted 1oa.
 
Its about not being punished for making mistakes. If you're getting 13 minutes a night, and you have to play perfectly to get 15, you're not going to try moves. If you're getting 18 minutes including PP time, you'll try something knowing you're gona get back on the ice.

Early in the season Kakko tried a move, lost the puck and gave up a goal. He was then benched for a shift.
He then later went out and scored a goal.
Its about knowing you're going to be given the opportunity to keep going so you keep trying.

Safe and boring play isn't what gets someone drafted 1oa.
So KK was benched for a shift and later scored a goal? So coaching held him back? Your definition of safe and boring may not be the same as others. If a player keeps carrying the puck in front of his only goalie and getting us scored on would you say that is okay and not coach him out of it? Brian Leetch was benched. So was Zibs, Kreider, Buch, Zooks, etc. Did that stop them from developing or would they say they probably did something dumb and learned from their benching?
 
So he jumps from 13 minutes a game to 15, and you see improvement, in a consensus first overall pick, but you say lets not give him another 4 minutes a game...
40 points with almost 0 consistent pp time is not a poor season.
Kirby Dach on MTL went from 26 points in 70 games in 18 minutes a game
to 38 points in 58 games, and people talk about how he made the next step.

Laf has never averaged 16 minutes a game. Laf was the consensus FIRST overall.

We've talked about this until we're blue in the face, but almost every team that gets a 1st overall, they jump right in, straight into the top 6, or first line, and they stay there.
Laf has never had consistent top 6 time, nor top 6 linemates. The kid line has been his most consistent linemates this season, and they dont get 18 minutes.
he doesn't get consistent powerplay time, to work and gain confidence with the extra space.

He's currently 3rd on the depth chart.

And yes right now this is a fantastic problem to have. But anyone who says "oh dont give him more time" is making a really weak argument.
i'm guessing that you didn''t bother to take 3 minutes to see the point i was attempting to make. or if you did you didn't like the results that popped up.

and i most likely will be in the minority on this whole entire board for thinking this but i'll stand by it since you brought up this player's name: i'll take dach over laffy all day n everyday.
 
So KK was benched for a shift and later scored a goal? So coaching held him back? Your definition of safe and boring may not be the same as others. If a player keeps carrying the puck in front of his only goalie and getting us scored on would you say that is okay and not coach him out of it? Brian Leetch was benched. So was Zibs, Kreider, Buch, Zooks, etc. Did that stop them from developing or would they say they probably did something dumb and learned from their benching?
Sure all of those players have been benched. And there’s a never ending narrative that the rangers can’t develop forwards as they took a while to actually develop. It took years for buch to get consistent ice time. Kreider never got past 30 goals until last season.
There’s also the narrative that the rangers have ruined Laf and Kakko.

You want to use all those players as guys the rangers developed, but look at buch and zucc now that they’re off the rangers? Both took off in that first year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vaheh
Sure all of those players have been benched. And there’s a never ending narrative that the rangers can’t develop forwards as they took a while to actually develop. It took years for buch to get consistent ice time. Kreider never got past 30 goals until last season.
There’s also the narrative that the rangers have ruined Laf and Kakko.

You want to use all those players as guys the rangers developed, but look at buch and zucc now that they’re off the rangers? Both took off in that first year.
A narrative? Zooks took off his first year in Minny? I do not think so. Kreider has been a huge success. As we speak Laf just missed a pass that should have led to KK having a breakaway. Darn Gallant lol.
 
We really don't know do we... Hughes got fed 19 minutes a game including pp1 time since his rookie year.
It took time but eventually hughes figured it out.

Talent is obviously a piece of it, but not getting sat for mistakes, and being willing to take chances and use creativity is a legit development strategy.
I get your point, but if you watched Hughes his rookie season, you could see the talent was there. He looked like a 1st overall pick, but just needed time to figure it out. Laf on the other hand struggled mightily and his talent level was put into question quite frequently.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad