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.
Ola said:
You are looking at the wrong parameters. You are mixing up the parameters.

What parameters affect how offensive/defensive minded a team is?

1. How hard you forecheck vs how many players you keep back.

2. Your transition game. Do you play it safe or take risks with the puck?

3. How deep you collapse in your own end. How hard to you pressure the puck carrier? The points?

4. How much you allow your D's to join the attack.

Etc. Etc. Etc. Right?

For Torts, the transition play was -- never -- in play. Our transition play was never designed to do anything else than to get the puck below the hashmarks, slow the other team down, and get a circle going. This worked in the trap-era, you beat the trap by just fireing the puck up ice along the boards in the neutral zone and you made sure that you weren't hit with counter-attacks by getting the puck all the way down below the hashmarks.

This is the problem with NY media. Torts sit infront of them and say that "safe is death", while only referring to 1 and 4 above. We forechecked really hard often under him, and early on our D's joined the attack. Safe was stamped in Torts forehead in relation to 2 or 3. Nobody picked up on it. Nobody even commented on it.

I had no problems what-so-ever with Torts job with 1, 3 and 4. But -- all -- the good teams in this league is moving in the other direction and taking bigger risks than ever in the transition game. You constantly see them finding players moving W-E in the neutral zone (look at Bergeron, Krejci, Marchand and co in Boston). You never ever saw that pass to a player like Bergeron or Marchand or Krejci skating just inside the redline from E to W in like 03'. A god ol' NJD trap would have eaten that pass alive, killed the player, picked his pockets and scored a goal. If you managed to take a pass there with 3 guys on aline on the redline, you where ***** once you tried to do something wtih the puck. Hooks, slashes, grabs and what not. There is a ton of room for those plays now though, due to the D's being pushed back when they can't defend the redline anymore.

Torts didn't figure that out.
Click to expand...


Thats all people say. Transition this transition that. Maybe we dont even have the players to do that?? Go become a coach then since you seem to know more than Torts
 
Ola said:
You are looking at the wrong parameters. You are mixing up the parameters.

What parameters affect how offensive/defensive minded a team is?

1. How hard you forecheck vs how many players you keep back.

2. Your transition game. Do you play it safe or take risks with the puck?

3. How deep you collapse in your own end. How hard to you pressure the puck carrier? The points?

4. How much you allow your D's to join the attack.

Etc. Etc. Etc. Right?

For Torts, the transition play was -- never -- in play. Our transition play was never designed to do anything else than to get the puck below the hashmarks, slow the other team down, and get a circle going. This worked in the trap-era, you beat the trap by just fireing the puck up ice along the boards in the neutral zone and you made sure that you weren't hit with counter-attacks by getting the puck all the way down below the hashmarks.

This is the problem with NY media. Torts sit infront of them and say that "safe is death", while only referring to 1 and 4 above. We forechecked really hard often under him, and early on our D's joined the attack. Safe was stamped in Torts forehead in relation to 2 or 3. Nobody picked up on it. Nobody even commented on it.

I had no problems what-so-ever with Torts job with 1, 3 and 4. But -- all -- the good teams in this league is moving in the other direction and taking bigger risks than ever in the transition game. You constantly see them finding players moving W-E in the neutral zone (look at Bergeron, Krejci, Marchand and co in Boston). You never ever saw that pass to a player like Bergeron or Marchand or Krejci skating just inside the redline from E to W in like 03'. A god ol' NJD trap would have eaten that pass alive, killed the player, picked his pockets and scored a goal. If you managed to take a pass there with 3 guys on aline on the redline, you where ***** once you tried to do something wtih the puck. Hooks, slashes, grabs and what not. There is a ton of room for those plays now though, due to the D's being pushed back when they can't defend the redline anymore.

Torts didn't figure that out.
Click to expand...

You need to have capable personnel to do all 4 of those things. Very few teams can. The Rangers certainly couldn't/cant.
 
Bleed Ranger Blue said:
Yes. Its pretty selfish to demand the type of hockey you want to see when, year after year, the GM fields teams lacking the skill and the depth to accomplish that.
Click to expand...

Well I disagree, and think this is a pretty capable team. Regarding selfishness, you must be an incredibly unselfish supporter demanding hockey you don't care to look at, for the better of the common good. IMO selfishness shouldn't be a factor in this debate.
 
Ilovemymum said:
Well I disagree, and think this is a pretty capable team. Regarding selfishness, you must be an incredibly unselfish supporter demanding hockey you don't care to look at, for the better of the common good. IMO selfishness shouldn't be a factor in this debate.
Click to expand...

Fine, dont call it selfishness is you'd like.

Call it wanting your type of entertainment, and arguing against roster realities in a futile attempt to get what you want.
 
Last edited:
Bleed Ranger Blue said:
Fine, dont call it selfishness is you'd like.

Call it wanting your type of entertainment, and arguing against roster realities in a futile attempt to get what you want.
Click to expand...

It's just a disagreement about the quality of the roster. I think they are capaple of playing good offensive hockey. We have a solid top 9 when they find their form, we might maybe lack some more involved (two way) D's but we have two solid goaltenders. And when play off comes, they might not be all worn out like the past years. Think a cup is as likely or even more likely this year or next, with some luck, as it has been during Torts. It's just my opinion though, not to be mistaken for undisputable realities:)
 
We haven't been consistent and the offense is frustrating. But man am I glad Torts is gone.
 
Raspewtin said:
We haven't been consistent and the offense is frustrating. But man am I glad Torts is gone.
Click to expand...

Please explain. And remember, don't make it about Tortorella. It can go for any of the 6 coaches in Sather's tenure.

Are you simply obsessed of getting rid of the guys that are on your television every night?
 
Mikos87 said:
It's about how the game is played, and what it takes these days to win.
Click to expand...

And a GM who incapable of constructing a team that can do those things on a consistent basis.

Instead we sign the Benoit Pouliots and Taylor Pyatt's of the world.
 
RangersHank said:
What fanboys? Youre probably one of the people who said the teams hidden offense will be unlocked when Torts got fired right?
Click to expand...

It pretty much has been, the Rangers are getting a ton more opportunities under AV. They just need to learn to close and bury it in the back of the net. They are close, the progress on the new system this year has been excellent. A few more weeks and the offense will be humming
 
GordonGecko said:
It pretty much has been, the Rangers are getting a ton more opportunities under AV. They just need to learn to close and bury it in the back of the net. They are close, the progress on the new system this year has been excellent. A few more weeks and the offense will be humming
Click to expand...

So they need to learn how to score goals -- the only thing that actually counts on the scoreboard. Funny, you would've figured they would have learned this along the way playing decades of hockey. Ill file this post away when you start whining about this coach next.
 
Bleed Ranger Blue said:
So they need to learn how to score goals -- the only thing that actually counts on the scoreboard.
Click to expand...
And how do you think those goals get scored? You need the scoring opportunities as a first step and they have been coming this year. The puck movement is so much better, and AV has a D man coming on on offense which Torts never did.

Tortorella was a suffocating disaster on this team, you can't repair that overnight. But the progress is there and I'm very happy with the direction the team is going in.
 
GordonGecko said:
And how do you think those goals get scored? You need the scoring opportunities as a first step and they have been coming this year. The puck movement is so much better, and AV has a D man coming on on offense which Torts never did.

Tortorella was a suffocating disaster on this team, you can't repair that overnight. But the progress is there and I'm very happy with the direction the team is going in.
Click to expand...

That team couldn't score. This team scores even less.

But Im glad some extra movement is tickling your fancy.
 
Ola said:
You are looking at the wrong parameters. You are mixing up the parameters.

What parameters affect how offensive/defensive minded a team is?

1. How hard you forecheck vs how many players you keep back.

2. Your transition game. Do you play it safe or take risks with the puck?

3. How deep you collapse in your own end. How hard to you pressure the puck carrier? The points?

4. How much you allow your D's to join the attack.

Etc. Etc. Etc. Right?

For Torts, the transition play was -- never -- in play. Our transition play was never designed to do anything else than to get the puck below the hashmarks, slow the other team down, and get a circle going. This worked in the trap-era, you beat the trap by just fireing the puck up ice along the boards in the neutral zone and you made sure that you weren't hit with counter-attacks by getting the puck all the way down below the hashmarks.

This is the problem with NY media. Torts sit infront of them and say that "safe is death", while only referring to 1 and 4 above. We forechecked really hard often under him, and early on our D's joined the attack. Safe was stamped in Torts forehead in relation to 2 or 3. Nobody picked up on it. Nobody even commented on it.

I had no problems what-so-ever with Torts job with 1, 3 and 4. But -- all -- the good teams in this league is moving in the other direction and taking bigger risks than ever in the transition game. You constantly see them finding players moving W-E in the neutral zone (look at Bergeron, Krejci, Marchand and co in Boston). You never ever saw that pass to a player like Bergeron or Marchand or Krejci skating just inside the redline from E to W in like 03'. A god ol' NJD trap would have eaten that pass alive, killed the player, picked his pockets and scored a goal. If you managed to take a pass there with 3 guys on aline on the redline, you where ***** once you tried to do something wtih the puck. Hooks, slashes, grabs and what not. There is a ton of room for those plays now though, due to the D's being pushed back when they can't defend the redline anymore.

Torts didn't figure that out.
Click to expand...

I agree with you 100% there on Torts. His idea of a transition game was to air it out the left boards and have Hagelin chase it down. He barked at Gaborik trying to get him to play that way, same with Kreider.

Transition defense in the neutral zone is what Torts didn't utilize, always having guys step back there and have the backcheckers try and force the turn overs instead of stepping up above the blue line. Rangers had the players to do it.

Torts sucked at breakouts and the PP. The rest of the game he coached was top notch. They needed a third guy on the bench, and didn't have it. Would have allowed for more.
 
GordonGecko said:
It pretty much has been, the Rangers are getting a ton more opportunities under AV. They just need to learn to close and bury it in the back of the net. They are close, the progress on the new system this year has been excellent. A few more weeks and the offense will be humming
Click to expand...



What if the guys just dont have the skill to finish? Chances dont really make me happy, i want some goals
 
GordonGecko said:
How do you know we have less goals and wins? The season isn't over yet genius
Click to expand...

The worst type of counter-argument you can provide is one based upon what might be.

Hey, I like free-wheeling open hockey too, but I dont like it being applied to a team that, by and large, has a roster that is no good for it.
 
If people are so hell bent on shot totals then I'll gladly point out that the Rangers are averaging a whopping one extra shot per game compared to last year.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom