Confirmed with Link: Head Coach Vacancy Pt IV — Rangers get permission to speak to Ruff

[The Gloaming]

If this team didnt have Lundqvist, I would almost welcome a Messier hire, the subsequent disaster, the (hopefully, but unlikely) death knell to the good ol' boy Oilers' network here in NYC.

But the fact the organization is wasting a HOF goalies career is a really sad thing.

This. Hank makes the team "tank-proof" to begin with, but if we hired Messier for one season, we could at least draft a top prospect. But we can't waste Hank's prime, and he'd never let this team be the oilers.

 

[JanErixon20]

Nope. I really did mean HockeyBasedNYC's post.

Hopefully our options are more than a coach with a bad track record and Messier.

Oh, that post. I was confused as you used the word "eloquent" to describe the other post.

Right now there are no coaches that have me excited to be coming to NY, so I can see why a guy like Messier is getting a good look, if the fans like it or not.

What if they hired Messier, promoted Beukeboom from the Whale to run the defense and hired a competent, experienced associate coach to run the power play/bench with Messier? Now I don't know who that is, but say a Doug Weight type of guy? Or keep 23 down in Hartford and have Schoenfeld fill that role? Although I think he wants to get out of coaching and back, "upstairs?"

 

[Jersey Girl]

What if they hired Messier, promoted Beukeboom from the Whale to run the defense and hired a competent, experienced associate coach to run the power play/bench with Messier? Now I don't know who that is, but say a Doug Weight type of guy?

No, for all the reasons HockeyBasedNYC stated. He said it better than I could.

 

[JanErixon20]

No, for all the reasons HockeyBasedNYC stated. He said it better than I could.

So an experienced coach with a good track record. Looks like you should be rooting for Vigneault then.

 

[Jersey Girl]

So an experienced coach with a good track record. Looks like you should be rooting for Vigneault then.

His post is anti-Messier. It does not advocate any type of coach or anyone in particular, just not Messier...which I agree with.

 

[NYR Viper]

His post is anti-Messier. It does not advocate any type of coach or anyone in particular, just not Messier...which I agree with.

As do I. If Mark wants to coach the Rangers, he needs to go down to the AHL and start as an Assistant. Like Beuk.

 

[The Gloaming]

For me it's:
Tippett
Eakins
AV

In that order.

 

[JanErixon20]

We all know what is going to happen: Messier will go coach the Oilers and win a few cups, and everyone here will blame Sather for not hiring him.

 

[Gordon Bombay]

For me it's:
Tippett
Eakins
AV

In that order.

I could be wrong here and I know Tippett has had success but doesn't he implement a very similiar defensive system that Torts? Isn't the idea that we need a fresh thought and more open system?

 

[Faxius]

For me it's:
Tippett
Eakins
AV

In that order.

Almost the same for me:

Tippett
Eakins
Boucher
AV

 

[Hitch16]

We Ranger fans are all on edge since the Tortorella dismissal. I know the Rangers were granted permission to speak with Eakins and Vigneault. As far as Mark Messier goes, as a head coach. I cannot definitively say he will be a success or failure. This team (at it's current state) is not the right for Messier right now (in my humble opinion). I respect and appreciate some of the suggestions but if Messier was named head coach, I would really hope that his assistants are former coaches with NHL experience. A Messier hire scares me to begin with. Hiring Messier and then naming (Just an example: Graves, Leetch, Beukeboom, etc) as the assistants are even more frightening.

If Tippett, Vigneault, or Eakins are the hire, I'd be excited for that. I also like the Mike Eaves idea but then I would contradict the Messier thought (Eaves doesn't have NHL experience).

 

[Ola]

It sounds like Dave Tippet doesn't want to re-sign with Phoenix unless ownership issues are resolved. They won't be before July 1 when his contract expires. Don Maloney has denied requests from unnamed teams to interview Tippet.

His regular season record as a head coach is stellar. Unfortunately his record in the post season is not so stellar, although he did face some hot teams in the first round.

Any opinions on him? Some people claim he hasn't developed young offensive players, and that his PP was never great. But I still like him better than all of the other coaches I've read about.

He is a good and thorough coach-coach. I definitely think he is a very good options compared to the people in running.

My take on the NHL right now is that the teams that are doing well right now have -- D's who move the puck really really well. Chicago doesn't have any god given talents on the blueline, but their group as a whole have been drilled for years and does a great job moving the puck. D to D. To forwards at center ice between the forecheckers and D's. Long stretch passes. I've for years said that I've been really impressed with Boston. No god given talents in terms of puck movement there either, but coaches who have really drilled it in and with just "capable" D's. In LA, Doughty is doing a helluva job. Makes it looks so easy. Voynov this year is also helping. When Pittsburgh is playing well, their D's are doing the same.

Looking at all teams that won the Cup after the lockout basically -- all their D's has been extremely good at moving the puck -- from Detroit to Pittsburgh (with Gonchar and Letang), to Chicago to Boston to LA.

At the top of my wishlist would definitely be the coach who are best fit at giving us an transition game. Someone who comes in here and say; hey we can't stop at what you have been doing in NY. You gotta be able to grind to win. But we can't be so afraid when we have the puck. We must attack when we have the puck and take it to the other team.

--Someone who tells McD, Staal, MDZ, Girardi, Strålman and co make that D to D pass. It will result in give aways, but everyone time you send that stretch pass up ice instead you give the puck away unless you have proper support. Chi, Bos, LAK and Pitt makes that pass on a shift by shift basis. We only made it last year when our D's were afraid of not being able to clear the puck.

--Someone who gets his centers to go E-W in the open area behind the forecheckers but infront of the D's, and orders his D's to make that pass even if it will result in give-aways at first/times. Boston is -- supposedly -- a similar team as us, how many times per games does their D's move the puck into that area? You will count 15-20+ times per game. How many times did we make those pass all of this season under Torts? I wonder if we tops 50 passes like that all year.

--Someone who tells his forwards to challenge D's on the attacking blueline. Our attack gotta start when we get the puck in our own end. Not when we get it below the has marks. Philly scores a ton of goals every year and a ton of goals they scores comes (i) from passing the puck up ice from their own end, (ii) receiving the puck in the neutralzone and hitting someone with speed, (iii) from there challenging the D's 1 on 1 and taking the puck to the net.

We only did that when we picked up pucks around the offensive blueline and took it up ice, and when trying to execute that fairly static and one-dimensional play where Nash and Gabby streaked down ice.

*Is Tipped that guy? Maybe, to an extent atleast. Much more so than Torts.

*Is AV that guy? Nah, not convinced of it. Van lived a ton on the Sedins... AV definitely does not have the same philosopy as Torts, but his teams definitely doesn't resemble Julien's for example in the sense that they use the entire ice to open up room and find ways to (i) get up ice or (ii) take the puck instantly to the net.

AV strikes me alot more as a coach who gets the job done, than one who "builds" and organization with and identity like say Julien or Babcock or Quenville.

*Is Dallas D that guy? I have no clue, but the AHL is defintely not the NHL, and especially not in this area of the game.

*Is Messier that guy? I have no clue of course, but in a sense the game today in these areas are closer to how the better teams played before 95' than from 95'-03'. The guys who had the biggest problems post-lockout are definitely the products of the 95'-03' trapping-era; John Tortorella, Marc Crawford and Bob Hartley. Those guys had success in that area because they could play an offensive game, using their stars, while not making misstakes in the netural zone. They played the absolute opposite way of how the best teams play today.

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

I also like the Mike Eaves idea but then I would contradict the Messier thought (Eaves doesn't have NHL experience).

Eaves has been an assistant coach in the NHL (with the Flyers and the Penguins).

 

[Hitch16]

Eaves has been an assistant coach in the NHL (with the Flyers and the Penguins).

Thanks Sing - I looked him up after I posted and thought "Oh boy - I better edit"

 

[Emptyvoid]

What's your opinion on Boucher, Ola?

 

[Clown Fiesta]

Think it will be AV or Tippett if he's available. Think Dalkas goes with Ruff and Vancouver hires Eakins.

Think either of the two I stated as my opinion would do a good job, AV's negatives are over exaggerated by Canucks fans in my opinion. They also probably became more evident towards the end of his tenure when the team wasn't buying in 100%.

Tippett got a lot out of those PHX teams.

 

[5 4 Fighting]

He is a good and thorough coach-coach. I definitely think he is a very good options compared to the people in running.

My take on the NHL right now is that the teams that are doing well right now have -- D's who move the puck really really well. Chicago doesn't have any god given talents on the blueline, but their group as a whole have been drilled for years and does a great job moving the puck. D to D. To forwards at center ice between the forecheckers and D's. Long stretch passes. I've for years said that I've been really impressed with Boston. No god given talents in terms of puck movement there either, but coaches who have really drilled it in and with just "capable" D's. In LA, Doughty is doing a helluva job. Makes it looks so easy. Voynov this year is also helping. When Pittsburgh is playing well, their D's are doing the same.

Looking at all teams that won the Cup after the lockout basically -- all their D's has been extremely good at moving the puck -- from Detroit to Pittsburgh (with Gonchar and Letang), to Chicago to Boston to LA.

At the top of my wishlist would definitely be the coach who are best fit at giving us an transition game. Someone who comes in here and say; hey we can't stop at what you have been doing in NY. You gotta be able to grind to win. But we can't be so afraid when we have the puck. We must attack when we have the puck and take it to the other team.

--Someone who tells McD, Staal, MDZ, Girardi, Strålman and co make that D to D pass. It will result in give aways, but everyone time you send that stretch pass up ice instead you give the puck away unless you have proper support. Chi, Bos, LAK and Pitt makes that pass on a shift by shift basis. We only made it last year when our D's were afraid of not being able to clear the puck.

--Someone who gets his centers to go E-W in the open area behind the forecheckers but infront of the D's, and orders his D's to make that pass even if it will result in give-aways at first/times. Boston is -- supposedly -- a similar team as us, how many times per games does their D's move the puck into that area? You will count 15-20+ times per game. How many times did we make those pass all of this season under Torts? I wonder if we tops 50 passes like that all year.

--Someone who tells his forwards to challenge D's on the attacking blueline. Our attack gotta start when we get the puck in our own end. Not when we get it below the has marks. Philly scores a ton of goals every year and a ton of goals they scores comes (i) from passing the puck up ice from their own end, (ii) receiving the puck in the neutralzone and hitting someone with speed, (iii) from there challenging the D's 1 on 1 and taking the puck to the net.

We only did that when we picked up pucks around the offensive blueline and took it up ice, and when trying to execute that fairly static and one-dimensional play where Nash and Gabby streaked down ice.

*Is Tipped that guy? Maybe, to an extent atleast. Much more so than Torts.

*Is AV that guy? Nah, not convinced of it. Van lived a ton on the Sedins... AV definitely does not have the same philosopy as Torts, but his teams definitely doesn't resemble Julien's for example in the sense that they use the entire ice to open up room and find ways to (i) get up ice or (ii) take the puck instantly to the net.

AV strikes me alot more as a coach who gets the job done, than one who "builds" and organization with and identity like say Julien or Babcock or Quenville.

*Is Dallas D that guy? I have no clue, but the AHL is defintely not the NHL, and especially not in this area of the game.

*Is Messier that guy? I have no clue of course, but in a sense the game today in these areas are closer to how the better teams played before 95' than from 95'-03'. The guys who had the biggest problems post-lockout are definitely the products of the 95'-03' trapping-era; John Tortorella, Marc Crawford and Bob Hartley. Those guys had success in that area because they could play an offensive game, using their stars, while not making misstakes in the netural zone. They played the absolute opposite way of how the best teams play today.

Very thorough analysis, and I must admit, very interesting to get your perspective on things Ola. I do agree that AV benefited from the Sedins instead of vice-versa, sometimes though, when one coach fails with an organization to win a cup, he comes to another team even more motivated and hungry to share his philosophy with the players. I think it's possible AV can come here and implement a more effective NHL transition game for us. What is Lindy Ruff's mentality? Is he more defensive minded? I do remember the Sabres being at the top of the league in GF post-lockout.

 

[BroadwayBlues]

Mark Messier?? I rather Paul Maurice. Yikes!

 

[Ilovemymum]

Mark Messier?? I rather Paul Maurice. Yikes!

Please not Messier. Why can't he get some coaching experience, if that's his ambition?

Tweet from Leonard With an article on Tippet:


http://www.azcentral.com/sports/coy...njoys-leap-of-faith-he-took-to-lift-team.html

 

[Bluenote13]

He is a good and thorough coach-coach. I definitely think he is a very good options compared to the people in running.

My take on the NHL right now is that the teams that are doing well right now have -- D's who move the puck really really well. Chicago doesn't have any god given talents on the blueline, but their group as a whole have been drilled for years and does a great job moving the puck. D to D. To forwards at center ice between the forecheckers and D's. Long stretch passes. I've for years said that I've been really impressed with Boston. No god given talents in terms of puck movement there either, but coaches who have really drilled it in and with just "capable" D's. In LA, Doughty is doing a helluva job. Makes it looks so easy. Voynov this year is also helping. When Pittsburgh is playing well, their D's are doing the same.

Looking at all teams that won the Cup after the lockout basically -- all their D's has been extremely good at moving the puck -- from Detroit to Pittsburgh (with Gonchar and Letang), to Chicago to Boston to LA.

At the top of my wishlist would definitely be the coach who are best fit at giving us an transition game. Someone who comes in here and say; hey we can't stop at what you have been doing in NY. You gotta be able to grind to win. But we can't be so afraid when we have the puck. We must attack when we have the puck and take it to the other team.

--Someone who tells McD, Staal, MDZ, Girardi, Strålman and co make that D to D pass. It will result in give aways, but everyone time you send that stretch pass up ice instead you give the puck away unless you have proper support. Chi, Bos, LAK and Pitt makes that pass on a shift by shift basis. We only made it last year when our D's were afraid of not being able to clear the puck.

--Someone who gets his centers to go E-W in the open area behind the forecheckers but infront of the D's, and orders his D's to make that pass even if it will result in give-aways at first/times. Boston is -- supposedly -- a similar team as us, how many times per games does their D's move the puck into that area? You will count 15-20+ times per game. How many times did we make those pass all of this season under Torts? I wonder if we tops 50 passes like that all year.

--Someone who tells his forwards to challenge D's on the attacking blueline. Our attack gotta start when we get the puck in our own end. Not when we get it below the has marks. Philly scores a ton of goals every year and a ton of goals they scores comes (i) from passing the puck up ice from their own end, (ii) receiving the puck in the neutralzone and hitting someone with speed, (iii) from there challenging the D's 1 on 1 and taking the puck to the net.

We only did that when we picked up pucks around the offensive blueline and took it up ice, and when trying to execute that fairly static and one-dimensional play where Nash and Gabby streaked down ice.

*Is Tipped that guy? Maybe, to an extent atleast. Much more so than Torts.

*Is AV that guy? Nah, not convinced of it. Van lived a ton on the Sedins... AV definitely does not have the same philosopy as Torts, but his teams definitely doesn't resemble Julien's for example in the sense that they use the entire ice to open up room and find ways to (i) get up ice or (ii) take the puck instantly to the net.

AV strikes me alot more as a coach who gets the job done, than one who "builds" and organization with and identity like say Julien or Babcock or Quenville.

*Is Dallas D that guy? I have no clue, but the AHL is defintely not the NHL, and especially not in this area of the game.

*Is Messier that guy? I have no clue of course, but in a sense the game today in these areas are closer to how the better teams played before 95' than from 95'-03'. The guys who had the biggest problems post-lockout are definitely the products of the 95'-03' trapping-era; John Tortorella, Marc Crawford and Bob Hartley. Those guys had success in that area because they could play an offensive game, using their stars, while not making misstakes in the netural zone. They played the absolute opposite way of how the best teams play today.

Excellent read Ola, great analysis. You are gunning for next season MVP, and deservedly so

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

Can they please just hire the coach so I can be disappointed already? Prolonging it will only make it worse.

 

[Vickers8]

Can they please just hire the coach so I can be disappointed already? Prolonging it will only make it worse.

BB hopefully soon so he can get acclimated a bit before, free agency and the draft...

 

[Vickers8]

Can they please just hire the coach so I can be disappointed already? Prolonging it will only make it worse.

Whoever Slats picks, he will be a disappointment to a lot of people on here, even if it was Scotty Bowman in his prime

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

BB hopefully soon so he can get acclimated a bit before, free agency and the draft...

Yeah, I hope the new coach has some input on the draft and potential trades (read: Del Zotto for a young forward+).

Whoever Slats picks, he will be a disappointment to a lot of people on here, even if it was Scotty Bowman in his prime

That is true. Honestly, I'd only be disappointed if Messier/Gretzky/Ruff were hired. I really like the other three main options in Tippet, Eakins, and AV, particularly Eakins.

 

[Vickers8]

I want a coach who will roll 4 lines and 3 d pairs, with a heavy forecheck, force the play to create oppurtunities, a coach who will let his dmen carry the puck into the offensive zone...