Maybe Torts Wasn't the Problem

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

And who's gonna come up big for us? Our second best goal scorer is ****ing Ryan Callahan.

Oh, and Callahan did come up big for the Rangers down the stretch, to the tune of 11 points in his final seven games (at least one point in each game). With a torn labrum.

 

[Zamboner]

Maybe Torts Wasn't the Problem.

Please. We wouldn't have even been in the second round if Hank doesn't pitch back-to-back shutouts. The condensed story of Tortorella's entire tenure here.

 

[BarbaraAlphanse]

Uh, he ran himself out of town because he played like ****. Funny how he didn't pick up his scoring when he went to Columbus, isn't it? Gaborik is shot. Ol' Yeller the dude.

Not denying he is shot. He is too injury prone and one dimensional. Part of what made him so dynamic in Minnesota was his speed. He lost a step with the Rangers. He needed to go. But he did not run himself out of town. Many players can continue on with a bad contract and injuries and not be traded. Richards should have gone before him, if we're judging on players who had to go based on their performance last year.

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

Please. We wouldn't have even been in the second round if Hank doesn't pitch back-to-back shutouts. The condensed story of Tortorella's entire tenure here.

I'm sure the Rangers and their five goal performance in game seven would have been fine without Hank making two to three difficult saves.

Game six, fine.

 

[chosen]

All coaches are replacable....I bet your vast years following the team taught you that. Us fans that aren't as wise as you just learned something new...

Since you have opened the Snarky Gates multiple times in your post, I feel no need to play nice with you. Most fans know quite a bit of the game. Perhaps you are the leader of the rest.

Maybe this just became apparent to you but if you've read this board since the day Torts was fired you would see not many posters pointed to the Bruins series as the ONLY reason Torts was fired.....

No they didn't and I never said they did. That's a reading comprehension failure on your part.

Probably not, what's the point of even bringing the Penguins series into this?

Most people understood the point, but don't feel bad. One of them can clue you in.

One series has nothing to do with the other. The Rangers won 1 game the Penguins won no games. The difference isn't that big.

Never said it was and that was the point. You really didn't understand that? That's a rhetorical question.

So Nash didn't deserve to get criticized? Gotcha....

You can criticize any player, but the point was that if Crosby and Malkin can get shut down by Boston, why should someone be annoyed or surprised that Nash was held in check? I think you are missing every single point unless you are being purposefully obtuse.

I think if Crosby and Malkin were Rangers and the team won a cup a few years ago people would give them a bit of a pass. This strange thing exists called context....

And this has what to do with what?

Nobody has a clue but this board is a place where fans can speculate. What's wrong with that? It's also not a stretch to say if the Rangers had better special teams they could've gone further. Does that point to the coach? Considering the day of Game 4 against the Bruins the coach is admitted it was a mistake to keep McD off the power play all year. Considering the coach pointed to his own short comings is it wrong for fans to speculate?

I have already asked a few other people the question as to where the Rangers would have finished with a "better" coach. Want to give it a try? Speculation is fine, but there has to be reasoning behind it. Hence, my question. I can speculate that Obama is posting in this thread or that Russian spies are monitoring this board. The point is to back up speculation, give reasons for the speculation, understand that if you say a coach is bad then you must believe the Rangers would have done better against Boston. So, is that your belief?

Most people understand that the Rangers have vastly inferior personnel to Boston other than in net, where Lundqvist keeps them in games where they are dominated. Maybe you don't understand that.

What do you suggest, should we shut down the board until training camp?

No need to. It is functioning well. People speculate. Others question the speculation. Perhaps you don't like being asked to think deeper than Torts sucks. I think that is lazy thinking.

So I guess you are in the Messier for coach category? Chosen wants Messier to coach the team. I don't know if you do but I can make the assumption from what you just said above. Just as you make assumptions about Rangers fans we can make assumptions about you.

You can make any assumptions you want. I don't want Messier, not because he will be a bad coach, but my feeling is that unless he wins he could be very bad for the franchise. By that I mean, he appears to be a pretty egotistic fellow that might have trouble adjusting his ways of thinking and stars tend to not be good coaches. This does not mean he might not be one. Just a gut reaction on my part, but there is no real evidence pointing in either direction.

None of us have a clue how the coach will work out, but we can make educated guesses. Whether somebody's right or wrong doesn't really matter to people that have lives.

Hopefully you will someday get one of those lives so you want have to deal with these trivialities of life.

Players don't matter?

Again, slow or purposefully obtuse? Oh, who are we kidding. This one is slow. I already pointed out that the most important part of the game is the GM. That is where players come from. Did your parents tell you the stork brought them?

I can't speak for Inferno, I don't get along with him BUT if he thinks he's wrong he's man enough to admit it. For you to call him out in this thread instead of sending him a friendly PM is complete garbage. It's the type of thing you'd expect from a teenager not somebody that is clearly much older than that. It's not a related not in the spirit of the thread you created. It's related in the I'm right you're wrong tone of almost all your posts.

I'm not surprised you don't get along with him. He understands the game. I wasn't calling him out. It was a friendly jibe based on a previous exchange. That is the 5th or so thing you got wrong in this thread. You are a consistent sort.

 

[Machinehead]

Oh, and Callahan did come up big for the Rangers down the stretch, to the tune of 11 points in his final seven games (at least one point in each game). With a torn labrum.

I'm not questioning what Callahan has accomplished. But he can't be the 2nd best sniper on your team if you want to win anything. He can't carry an offense. He tried his damn best in the playoffs, but obviously it didn't work.

 

[BarbaraAlphanse]

I'm sure the Rangers and their five goal performance in game seven would have been fine without Hank making two to three difficult saves.

Game six, fine.

The final 3 goals occurred because the Capitals threw the towel in. Blame Oates, blame frustration, blame whatever. That stemmed from Henrik's dominance.

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

Not denying he is shot. He is too injury prone and one dimensional. Part of what made him so dynamic in Minnesota was his speed. He lost a step with the Rangers. He needed to go. But he did not run himself out of town. Many players can continue on with a bad contract and injuries and not be traded. Richards should have gone before him, if we're judging on players who had to go based on their performance last year.

So him scoring a mere nine goals in 36 games wasn't why he was traded? Why was he traded? Because Tortorella was a meanie?

He was traded because he wasn't contributing, simple as that. So, yes, he did run himself out of town, and in the end, I'm glad he did, because the Rangers wouldn't have Brassard, Moore, and Dorsett if he didn't.

 

[BarbaraAlphanse]

Oh, and Callahan did come up big for the Rangers down the stretch, to the tune of 11 points in his final seven games (at least one point in each game). With a torn labrum.

He should have a Dustin Brown role on this team. Kings have Kopitar, Richards, Carter, in terms of players they rely on to carry the load offensively before Brown.

We had Callahan in our top 2. Need more production from your skill players.

 

[chosen]

Just like with the players, I judge the coach based on what I see on the ice. I saw a team that was routinely trapped in its own zone for long stretches. IMO, that isn't a product of the roster. It's a product of the strategies employed by the coach. I see an incompetent power play. Different personnel may help, but strategy plays a big part on the PP. I see the way Torts handled some of the players and how those players reacted. Some responded well to his coaching style. Some didn't. I didn't see in him an ability to adjust based on his roster, to use different approaches with different players when it was called for.

All of these things contribute to my opinion of the job he did. That doesn't make them fact. It doesn't prove anything. If you disagree, that's fine.



Did you not say this:



Those are your words, not mine. If you can't see how false that statement is, I don't know what to tell you.

And you're wrong. People are criticizing Torts, but I haven't seen anyone suggest that with a better coach, this team would have won the cup.

Just because I criticize Torts doesn't mean I think Sather is doing a good job, or that the roster is championship caliber. All it means is that I don't think Torts is the right coach for this team going forward, and I think bringing in a different voice with a different system will benefit the team.



You're making the mistake of assuming the problem has to be one or the other. It's my contention that it's both. Torts doesn't get a pass because the roster is flawed. The players don't get a pass because Torts is flawed. They all share the blame. Torts will be replaced. Some of the players will be replaced.



Whether the Rangers personnel was better or not isn't really relevant. Having the better team on paper doesn't mean you are going to win. Ask the pens about that.

Last year, the Rangers played Tort's system as well as they possibly could. They blocked shots, they forechecked and they worked hard at both ends of the ice. The team was 11th overall in scoring during the season and 3rd in goals against. They finished 2nd overall in the league and top 4 in the playoffs. The Rangers finished ahead of boston in both the regular season and the playoffs.

If the Rangers had played the bruins in the playoffs last year, yes, maybe boston would have won. Which means what, exactly? That they match up well against us? That they have better players? That their coach is better than our coach? Or maybe it's some combination of all 3. The point is, you can't just point to the roster and say that's the reason, anymore than anyone else can point to Torts and say he is the only reason we lost.



Yes, boston is a more complete team. I won't argue that. But it is my contention that they are more complete because they both have a better roster AND because they have a better coach who is able to get the most out of that roster.

Again, blaming one doesn't absolve the other.



Of course it is. You'll never see me defend Sather. Sather said it himself. The only measure of success is winning and the Rangers haven't done that during his tenure.



Not a guarantee, but if the players aren't playing their best because the coach lost the room, then it stands to reason that with a new coach, they will be more motivated. The results may or may not change, but keeping the old coach certainly isn't going to help the situation. As I said, addition by subtraction.

Torts isn't the only reason the Rangers lost, but he is A reason. To completely absolve him of blame as you tried to do in your OP is just as foolish as those who claim he is the only reason we aren't contenders.

We agree about some things and disagree about others. No big deal.

 

[BarbaraAlphanse]

So him scoring a mere nine goals in 36 games wasn't why he was traded? Why was he traded? Because Tortorella was a meanie?

He was traded because he wasn't contributing, simple as that. So, yes, he did run himself out of town, and in the end, I'm glad he did, because the Rangers wouldn't have Brassard, Moore, and Dorsett if he didn't.

How much of that was a result of having no motivation to play for this coach, for being benched in games, for being placed on lines with Brian Boyle and Taylor Pyatt as his line mates? You don't put those type of players with those type of linemates. He needed to play better, but the coach needed to coach him better too. Which is why both were removed from the team.

 

[Vidic15*]

I am overjoyed Tortorella is gone. I was sick of his putrid collapsing system and his boner using "the boards".

 

[Machinehead]

He should have a Dustin Brown role on this team. Kings have Kopitar, Richards, Carter, in terms of players they rely on to carry the load offensively before Brown.

We had Callahan in our top 2. Need more production from your skill players.

Brown is probably the 3rd best finisher on that team behind Carter and Williams. If Callahan was 3rd on our team I think we'd be in good shape. It's nice to have 2 way guys like Stepan and guys like Brassard who can make their whole line better, but you also need some guys who are out there to do one thing. Shoot the puck into the net.

 

[chosen]

Please with the "without Lundqvist" crap. With an ordinary goalie, the Bruins aren't a playoff team either. I call it crap, because the statement is meaningless.

I truly believe that, when the Rangers are healthy and playing their best, there isn't a team in the league they can't beat in a 7 game series, even if the opponent is at their best.

We have roster issues, to be sure. So does everyone else. Good for the Bruins that they had the D in the stables to survive the injuries to Seidenberg and Ference. If they had forward injuries instead, things wouldn't look so great for them, since their depth beyond their top-12 isn't all that good.

I never would claim that coaching was the only issue here, but it definitely was one.

You can't possibly be comparing Rask to Lundqvist. Reverse goalies and it's a fair series. Rangers lose, but it's a different game. As much as people appreciate Hank, I don't think they realize just how good he is.

 

[BarbaraAlphanse]

Brown is probably the 3rd best finisher on that team behind Carter and Williams. If Callahan was 3rd on our team I think we'd be in good shape.

Kopitar was dynamic in their cup run last year. He scored big big goals for them when the Kings needed them. His absence on offense is noted in their offensive stagnation this year.

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

How much of that was a result of having no motivation to play for this coach, for being benched in games, for being placed on lines with Brian Boyle and Taylor Pyatt as his line mates? You don't put those type of players with those type of linemates. He needed to play better, but the coach needed to coach him better too. Which is why both were removed from the team.

If winning games wasn't enough motivation for Gaborik, then he earned himself a ticket out of town.

While I don't like the fact that Tortorella put Gaborik on LW, he didn't have much of a choice with Kreider flopping and no Zuccarello/Clowe/Brassard. Pyatt was the 2nd best LW option. Would you have rather had Pyatt on the second line?

Again, the blame goes back to the guy in management.

 

[Machinehead]

Kopitar was dynamic in their cup run last year. He scored big big goals for them when the Kings needed them. His absence on offense is noted in their offensive stagnation this year.

Kopitar is more of a playmaker though. We have good playmakers. We need another guy who focuses on shooting first. Brassard put up a **** ton of point in the playoffs but only 2 of them were goals.

 

[chosen]

Disagree completely. This team on paper is about as talented as there is a team out there. Forwards and Defensemen

List the gifted offensive defensemen. All the remaining teams have them.

Who are their offensive forces that scare the opposition?

Nash and ?

 

[chosen]

That's his game. If you want everyone to play a complete game that's a good way to not score goals.

It's working beautifully for the Bruins.

 

[chosen]

This.

The team managed to scrap together MAYBE 10 good games this season. They were a disaster.

Eighth or so best team in the league is a disaster?

 

[Hi ImHFNYR]

Management was bringing Torts back. They gave him an extension during the season. Go look at Sather's comments to Brooks a few weeks before Torts was fired. John had one year remaining the extension he signed in 2011. The players were sick of John. Management had bo choice. Of course,the experts on these boards will say management should have about the disconnect. Management doesn't belong in the room with the players. That is the coaches domain.

I don't think it's about people being fake experts I think it's more about Sather being legitimately awful the majority of the time and people hating him for good reason. Anyway as many said There was a lot wrong and Torts had to go

 

[Zamboner]

Eighth or so best team in the league is a disaster?

Hank.

 

[chosen]

Apologize for what exactly? It's called hyperbole, it's a pretty common occurrence around here, maybe I should have added the sarcasm smiley?

I'm sorry you didn't realize that, you'd think you would considering this topic has been dissected 100 times over already in the last week or so, and that the point I was illustrating with my horrible, sinful, deceitful made up quote was that the players were unhappy with Torts. Which again has been discussed a multitude of times.

So yes, I'm sorry that I mislead you. Now do you want to leave that alone and discuss the actual topic?

You don't seem to grasp the difference between hyperbole and making something up.

 

[Hi ImHFNYR]

Eighth or so best team in the league is a disaster?

Look at the teams performance outside of net compared to other teams. They were disastrous way too often.

 

[BarbaraAlphanse]

If winning games wasn't enough motivation for Gaborik, then he earned himself a ticket out of town.

While I don't like the fact that Tortorella put Gaborik on LW, he didn't have much of a choice with Kreider flopping and no Zuccarello/Clowe/Brassard. Pyatt was the 2nd best LW option. Would you have rather had Pyatt on the second line?

Again, the blame goes back to the guy in management.

Oh please. Then why didn't all 18 of our skaters get traded? Our team had a motivational problem from game 1 this season. Something happened in the locker room. Torts wasn't effective. I'm not blaming Torts for everything but he made some idiotic moves. Moves not only idiotic on the ice but idiotic in terms of what they did with the relationships he had with the players. He killed the confidence of Richards, Gaborik, Kreider... those 3 could have been huge contributors.

Kreider flopped? He had boned chips in his ankle all season. Have you played with bone chips in your ankle? I've heard they are very painful and debilitating. Additionally, he yo-yo'ed him. Up and down in the line up, up and down on the team and to AHL. You don't do that with a top prospect. You develop him properly. You give him ample time and chances to develop.

Enough of this "he didn't earn it" lunacy. He's your TOP prospect. You MUST develop him properly. If he's up in your big club you play him top 9 minutes consistently and you reassure him to BOOST his confidence. If he's not ready you play him top 3 minutes in your AHL affiliate until he is ready and then you give him proper chances to prove himself in the NHL. When Kreider killed it in the NHL he was still only used on the 4th line. Idiotic.

Same goes for putting Gabby and Richards on the 3rd line with a bunch of grinders. Whats that going to do to their confidence? It's certainly not going to help them when they have even less of a chance to score goals.

We did not have enough depth, exactly. Our players did not perform, no argument there. But our coach was a big part of the problem and he needed to go. Motivation is winning? Again, then we must have traded all 18 guys and not just Gaborik.