Toggle sidebar

Speculation: How Many Players Now Regret the Tortorella Firing?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mr Atoz*
  • Start date Start date
  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
Drewbackatu said:
McD is the only great skater; Staal is better than average but in some games spends more time off his skates than on; DZ is an average skater at best and Stralman constantly gets beat to the outside and Girardi is also no better than average.



Chicago? Let's not get silly and try to compare our "D" to theirs.
Click to expand...

John Moore? Agreed, rather not have the Chicago/NYR defense comparison convo again.
 
Honestly probably only people like Asham since AV isn't about having that enforcer on the ice. However I don't think any player really regrets it.... similar to school whether you switch classes and get another teacher, or move into a higher grade/ higher level classes there is always a transition period that it is always harder to begin with before things kinda level out.

I think the players and management planned for this... now if they only are a .500 team then more may not like the firing of torts.
 
Barbara Underhill said:
You're simply using a strawman argument and moving the goalposts so that Dubinsky can fit into YOUR definition of a good player. He didn't and doesn't always backcheck like a monster. Speaking in absolutes doesn't make your argument stronger. He isn't a goal scorer that is fine, but at every level he generally scored close to the same amount of goals and assists. He did it here and hasn't done it since '11-'12 so now you're saying he was never supposed to score goals, so those years were flukes? Good to know thank you for clarifying.
Click to expand...

First--based on this post, you have no idea what a strawman argument or moving the goalposts even mean. Please stop accusing me of things that you don't understand. If you want a look at a strawman argument, look at your last two sentences quoted above. I never said that Dubinsky was never supposed to score goals. I said that he's never been a goalscorer.

You aren't entitled to your own facts, either. You claim that Dubinsky has "at every level...generally scored close to the same amount of goals and assists." That's just not true. It's not even close. Going back to his WHL days (11 years ago) Dubinsky has had more than double the number of assists than goals in 5 of those 11 years (and it appears that number is trending towards 6/12 based on this year). Of the other years, his assist total was 10+ higher than his goal total in all but three years--those three years being the two years that he played wing for the Rangers, and his second year with the Wolfpack (06/07)

Out of 12 seasons of high-level hockey, he has only put up "close to the same amount of goals and assists" in 3. The other years, he was putting up far more (often more than double) assists than goals. So yeah, I would classify those two years at wing as flukes when it comes to goalscoring.

Everyone has bias, I don't dislike Dubinsky as a player I simply do not feel that he is as good as you think he is. He would be a great 3rd line center for our team. You called him out for not shooting altogether, real big knock. Maybe it's because his game fell apart and he wasn't even getting himself into good position. You also act like him not being active in the offensive zone is a good thing because he's willing to backcheck. I have never seen a player more romanticized in my life than Brandon Dubinsky.
Click to expand...

Now see, there's another strawman argument. This whole stupid argument happened because you jumped into the middle of a discussion where I took issue with this statement from another poster: "You think Torts didn't notice him half-ass every other back check like we did?" Dubinsky didn't half-ass back checks. That doesn't mean that I was happy with how he was playing offensively at all.

Over the course of this thread, YOU are the one who has changed your argument, moved the goalposts, set up strawman arguments, intentionally (and dishonestly) manipulated statistics, made up your own statistics (like the one about him supposedly scoring around the same number of goals and assists) and claimed to be objective about a player you have claimed was "sickening."

When the arguments were shown to be poor and the statistics were shown to be false, you resorted to trying to call me out as biased (ad hominem--you may have actually accomplished all of the logical fallacies in this thread). Take a look at my posting history. I've called him out for what he did poorly. When someone else said they hoped Dubi would win if he got in a fight with Dorsett, I was the first one to post that Dubi was great, but that I hoped Dorsett (a Ranger) kicked Dubi's (a now non-Ranger) ass.

This board has a tendency to dismiss anything good anybody has done in the past. It happened with Renney. It happened with Torts. It happened with Dubi. It's happening now with DZ. Too many people see what they want to see instead of the big picture. You are one of them. And I am done with you. Enjoy winning the internet by making up and/or manipulating stats while simultaneously accusing others of the very same logical fallacies that you are actually committing.

To the other folks reading the thread--I apologize for the detour that we took it down. I had to respond to that last post because of how aggravating it was, but I am done with that side-debate in this thread. Again--apologies.
 
smoneil said:
First--based on this post, you have no idea what a strawman argument or moving the goalposts even mean. Please stop accusing me of things that you don't understand. If you want a look at a strawman argument, look at your last two sentences quoted above. I never said that Dubinsky was never supposed to score goals. I said that he's never been a goalscorer.

You aren't entitled to your own facts, either. You claim that Dubinsky has "at every level...generally scored close to the same amount of goals and assists." That's just not true. It's not even close. Going back to his WHL days (11 years ago) Dubinsky has had more than double the number of assists than goals in 5 of those 11 years (and it appears that number is trending towards 6/12 based on this year). Of the other years, his assist total was 10+ higher than his goal total in all but three years--those three years being the two years that he played wing for the Rangers, and his second year with the Wolfpack (06/07)

Out of 12 seasons of high-level hockey, he has only put up "close to the same amount of goals and assists" in 3. The other years, he was putting up far more (often more than double) assists than goals. So yeah, I would classify those two years at wing as flukes when it comes to goalscoring.



Now see, there's another strawman argument. This whole stupid argument happened because you jumped into the middle of a discussion where I took issue with this statement from another poster: "You think Torts didn't notice him half-ass every other back check like we did?" Dubinsky didn't half-ass back checks. That doesn't mean that I was happy with how he was playing offensively at all.

Over the course of this thread, YOU are the one who has changed your argument, moved the goalposts, set up strawman arguments, intentionally (and dishonestly) manipulated statistics, made up your own statistics (like the one about him supposedly scoring around the same number of goals and assists) and claimed to be objective about a player you have claimed was "sickening."

When the arguments were shown to be poor and the statistics were shown to be false, you resorted to trying to call me out as biased (ad hominem--you may have actually accomplished all of the logical fallacies in this thread). Take a look at my posting history. I've called him out for what he did poorly. When someone else said they hoped Dubi would win if he got in a fight with Dorsett, I was the first one to post that Dubi was great, but that I hoped Dorsett (a Ranger) kicked Dubi's (a now non-Ranger) ass.

This board has a tendency to dismiss anything good anybody has done in the past. It happened with Renney. It happened with Torts. It happened with Dubi. It's happening now with DZ. Too many people see what they want to see instead of the big picture. You are one of them. And I am done with you. Enjoy winning the internet by making up and/or manipulating stats while simultaneously accusing others of the very same logical fallacies that you are actually committing.

To the other folks reading the thread--I apologize for the detour that we took it down. I had to respond to that last post because of how aggravating it was, but I am done with that side-debate in this thread. Again--apologies.
Click to expand...

You need to work on your interpretive skills. My argument has consistently been that Dubinsky isn't as good as you make him out to be, you keep twisting his negatives into positives.

65% of his points going back to Portland have been assists, it's not as large of a discrepancy as you are trying to make it appear to be.
 
GWOW said:
Everybody had every reason to love Dubinsky. The bottom line is that he stopped being a difference maker. Sather saw that and made a move.

Trust me. I liked the kid and it sucked watching him struggle. But for every scoring chance he had or set up, there were 10 times as many blind centering passes leading to odd man rushes. When your center is behind the net and his centering pass is intercepted, he's automatically the last guy back in transition, but with his speed, there was no excusing some of the plays he failed to make defensively.
Click to expand...

I loved Dubi and was the first to hype him. You could tell even when he was in the Whl that he could make a difference.

But he had like a selfawareness that was bothersome.
 
SnowblindNYR said:
I figure this is as good a thread as any post this question. Did Sedins have their breakout under AV or before AV?
Click to expand...

Before AV for sure.

The Sedin's needed 4 full years before they started to put up pts in the NHL. But even before that, they from time to time played pretty fantastic hockey.
 
Ola said:
Before AV for sure.

The Sedin's needed 4 full years before they started to put up pts in the NHL. But even before that, they from time to time played pretty fantastic hockey.
Click to expand...

Did you watch the Canucks under AV? Were they playing the same style as the Rangers or did AV adapt to the Rangers' style?
 
I feel this gif needs to be on our board somewhere.

xJzcUwH.gif
 
Not for nothing, the Canucks board is awash with complaints about "offensive ineptitude". Where have we heard that before??? I wonder how long before the nuck fans start to realize that maybe it's not just their players that mysteriously lost their talent overnight?

serge2k said:
If they can't hack it then trade them. Of course I don't think this is the case at all, they are by far the best players on the team and should stay.

So many excuses for the complete offensive ineptitude. So much blame on Luongo.
Click to expand...
 
Bleed Ranger Blue said:
If you want to look at things objectively, the first 10 games were as bad as I've seen the Rangers play.
Click to expand...

I disagree that the whole ten game sample represents the worst we've ever seen. We ran two teams out of their own buildings. Then we in turn got run out of three buildings and yes in those games we played some of the worst hockey ever. But isn't taking a ten game sample looking in a vacuum? You can objectively look in a vacuum but it's a small sample size for sure. In this 10 game sample the team ranged from horrific-great.

Now that the sample size has expanded we see them having more consistency and winning more often. More importantly the 6-0 loss thing has not been repeated. so it seems to be a fluke, an outlier on a (what appears to be) slightly above average team. We did have that great GA streak too. That's more important then the three atrocious games we played in that 10 game sample because it shows greater consistency and it also (not coincidentally) happened with a healthier team.

Funny things happen game-game. That team at the beginning of the season, during your 10 game sample, dominated a Quick-led King team and this much more consistent team just got shutout by a Scrivens-led Kings team. That's to be expected in hockey but it's the greater consistency that must be looked at I think. There is value in small samples of hockey too but a ton of outliers can appear by doing that.
 
Last edited:
Maybe it's selective memory, but I don't recall the Rangers being blown out like this under Torts. What is this, four or five times already this year?
 
Mr Atoz said:
Maybe it's selective memory, but I don't recall the Rangers being blown out like this under Torts. What is this, four or five times already this year?
Click to expand...

I think it was something like several years without allowing 5 goals in a game, as well having an undefeated record when leading after 2 for several years in a row. Some ridiculous number.

Shame to see how people take him when he's just mistreating media members and not fans themselves. He was great with fans, heard nothing but great things about the dog walk, and the charity work he did around the city.

Basically effort and compete level were never questioned, so you didn't see these minor league type blowouts. Torts got Brassard to play at a ppg pace, but look at him now.
 
Mr Atoz said:
Maybe it's selective memory, but I don't recall the Rangers being blown out like this under Torts. What is this, four or five times already this year?
Click to expand...

10/19/2009 - SJ 7 - NYR 3
11/28/2009 - NYR 3 - PIT 8
12/30/2009 - PHI 6 - NYR 0
1/23/2010 - NYR 0 - MTL 6

Stopped looking after finding 4 games in the first year... selective memory.
 
At this point, there is really one main thing that I miss from the Torts regime: having a team with solid conditioning that can actually play in back-to-backs.

GordonGecko said:
Not for nothing, the Canucks board is awash with complaints about "offensive ineptitude". Where have we heard that before??? I wonder how long before the nuck fans start to realize that maybe it's not just their players that mysteriously lost their talent overnight?
Click to expand...

What talented offensive players have lost their talent? The Sedins? With 22 and 25 points in 26 games? Kesler, with 17? That roster isn't terribly offensively talented.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom