Maybe Torts Wasn't the Problem

[PlamsUnlimited]

There is fault all through the chain of command, that's how it usually is...

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

I'm sure he also bet on Gabby and Richie not sucking. Sometimes **** doesn't go to plan. I'm not defending Sather. His poor track record speaks for itself. But Sather wasn't the only issue with this team.

No but he's been the one constant on all the teams of recent memory.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

I'm sure he also bet on Gabby and Richie not sucking. Sometimes **** doesn't go to plan. I'm not defending Sather. His poor track record speaks for itself. But Sather wasn't the only issue with this team.

Richards at least put up points. Gabby was horrible, but the players he traded him for were great. Kreider still falled to produce after the trade, which annoyed me. He gets a fresh start this season from me, but I won't be so kind of he has another poor one.

 

[PlamsUnlimited]

If Gaborik was producing steadily, we'd have seen a better on-ice product. But the players had from the trade are pretty damn nice to have. If Kreider puts it together and gets his head out of his ass, and plays hockey like he knows he can, and 2ndary scoring does such a thing, this team and hopefully a coach who works well with them, will actually look good.

 

[Chief]

Now that Boston has wasted Pittsburgh, isn't it apparent to most people that the reason the Rangers loss to the Bruins had nothing to do with their coach?

Is their anyone out there who believes that Rangers personnel is better than Pittsburgh, aside from goaltender?

The Rangers put up a much more competitive series than Pitt did. Yes, they only won one game, but Pitt looked totally overmatched. The Rangers didn't.

Toronto pushed Boston to the limit. Does that have a bearing on the Pens or Rangers? I don't think so but if you're looking for a conclusion, maybe it means that Randy Carlyle is a better coach than Torts or Bylsma. I'd agree with that.

 

[ThisYearsModel]

I am neither a Torts supporter or hater. I think he is a good coach, but he is easily replaceable. That is because they all are.

Now that Boston has wasted Pittsburgh, isn't it apparent to most people that the reason the Rangers loss to the Bruins had nothing to do with their coach?

Is their anyone out there who believes that Rangers personnel is better than Pittsburgh, aside from goaltender?

The Rangers put up a much more competitive series than Pitt did. Yes, they only won one game, but Pitt looked totally overmatched. The Rangers didn't.

Those of you who criticized Nash during the series would now be screaming that Crosby and Malkin suck if you were Penguins fans.

The Rangers finished up about where they should have, despite all the crying and moaning throughout this site. In the thread speculating about who should coach next, we have people explaining that this coach would be a great choice or a terrible choice without having a clue how any coach will end up doing.

To me, it's funny watching a fan say that his choice will be a "great fit" or a disaster that will wreak havoc on our city. Face it, none of us has a clue how a coach will work out, and my very minority opinion is that barring the very rare exception of incompetence, it doesn't matter in the least who is chosen to run the show.

What matters most is the GM and luck.

On an unrelated matter, Krug is the real deal. Let me know when you come around on that one, Inferno.

Was the coach the problem? Yes. His system was a problem and the way he treated the players was a problem. Watching Boston, Pittsburgh, Chicago and Los Angeles actually make PASSES to teammates to get the puck out of the zone was maddening when comparing them to us. Watching them skate to cover the point men was maddening to watch compared with us. Watching them create so many scoring chances compared to our constipated system was maddening to watch. We don't really know what the true quality of talent the Rangers have, because it was all dumbed down by the idiotic Tortorella system. Heck.......these teams actually passed the puck IN THE MIDDLE OF THEIR DEFENSIVE ZONE! Imagine that!

 

[Kwayry]

The system didn't suit the roster. How many times were you yelling to clear the zone when they were hemmed in their own zone for minutes at a time?
Do you know what the reason for that is? the system.

The system is pretty simple to defeat, we've seen so many times. in the Rangers Dzone, hold on to the puck long enough for all 5 Rangers skaters to be around the puck along the half wall, then pass it across the ice to an open dman that can walk in, aim and fire the puck unmolested.
You lose the puck against the Rangers, crowd the walls, you will get it back soon enough, then Start over again.
When the Rangers have the puck in the neutral zone, you can cheat knowing they will dump and chase, how many times were you amazed that there was often no Ranger forward around the puck when they dumped it in?
When they have the puck in the Ozone, there was no slot presence. They are all behind the net playing catch or cycling endlessly until there is a weak shot from the sides.
The PP was powerless, it looked impotent even on 5 on 3.
I like a lot of what Torts brought to this team, accountability, discipline, sense of identity, but his system needed changing. I expected he'd be at least required to hire an offensive coach. Maybe he was asked and refused hence his firing.

 

[Chief]

You don't think Brassard is better than Dupuis either?

That guy is so overrated it's unbelievable.

So you're going to use Dupuis' past stats to bash him but Brassard is great after 25 games with the Rangers??? Maybe he's finally putting it together (I hope so) but Brassard has shown little in his NHL career other than he's a mediocre player...and I'm basing that on 3 full seasons prior to this last one where he never cracked 47 points and this season in Columbus where he put up 18 points in 34 games.

Hagelin, Brassard and Zuccarello also didn't disappear the second our team's top forwards in Stepan and Nash were shut down. They don't rely on them to produce, they produce themselves. I really don't get why it's so hard for everyone to see and admit that Kunitz and Dupuis rely on Crosby Malkin and Letang to produce offense. It's not huge mindblowing idea.

When did Hagelin and Zucc prove they were better than average NHL players. Hags this season: 30 points in 60 games (reg season and po's); Zucc: 15 points in 27 games (reg season and po's).

BTW - You're underrating Neal.

 

[Nac Mac Feegle]

The system didn't suit the roster. How many times were you yelling to clear the zone when they were hemmed in their own zone for minutes at a time?
Do you know what the reason for that is? the system.

The system is pretty simple to defeat, we've seen so many times. in the Rangers Dzone, hold on to the puck long enough for all 5 Rangers skaters to be around the puck along the half wall, then pass it across the ice to an open dman that can walk in, aim and fire the puck unmolested.
You lose the puck against the Rangers, crowd the walls, you will get it back soon enough, then Start over again.
When the Rangers have the puck in the neutral zone, you can cheat knowing they will dump and chase, how many times were you amazed that there was often no Ranger forward around the puck when they dumped it in?
When they have the puck in the Ozone, there was no slot presence. They are all behind the net playing catch or cycling endlessly until there is a weak shot from the sides.
The PP was powerless, it looked impotent even on 5 on 3.
I like a lot of what Torts brought to this team, accountability, discipline, sense of identity, but his system needed changing. I expected he'd be at least required to hire an offensive coach. Maybe he was asked and refused hence his firing.

I have a funny feeling that's probably what happened. I'm still not sold on the whole 'players revolt' idea tossed around.

One interesting article I did dig up with player reaction to Torts' dismissal:
http://www.expressen.se/sport/hockey/nhl/hagelin-hyllar-tranaren---trots-stora-sagningen/

Seems at least Hagelin wasn't at odds with Torts and was surprised by the firing.

 

[Kershaw]

There are deficiencies all around this team. From the owner, to the front office, to the coaching staff, to the players.

Out of all the things I just listed, I think the coaching staff is least to blame. And I find it unbelievable that people can look at this roster, from 1-20 any given night, and think they should be mandated to make it past the 2nd round. You wont find many coaches, if any at all, that can turn chicken **** into chicken salad.

Truer words can't be spoken!

 

[broadwayblue]

There are deficiencies all around this team. From the owner, to the front office, to the coaching staff, to the players.

Out of all the things I just listed, I think the coaching staff is least to blame. And I find it unbelievable that people can look at this roster, from 1-20 any given night, and think they should be mandated to make it past the 2nd round. You wont find many coaches, if any at all, that can turn chicken **** into chicken salad.

You realize all of 4 teams make it past the 2nd round, right? Not sure who thinks this team should be mandated for the finals. I'm also not sure how you equate not making the final four with being chicken ****.

 

[Boruto]

as much as I agree there's value in reassessing our season long hatred toward the work of Torts/Torts himself, at this point (too early), it's basically going to end up being a stir fry of the leftovers and warmed up in the microwave. A little bit of Hagelin Hash, Stepan Shrooms, Kreider Kale, Power play peas, Henrik ham, Boyle Bread, collapsing carrots, possession pulled pork, transition turkey etc.

 

[BBKers]

Regarding this thread

Maybe we should play a handful games without that maniac before we assume whatever

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Was the coach the problem? Yes. His system was a problem and the way he treated the players was a problem. Watching Boston, Pittsburgh, Chicago and Los Angeles actually make PASSES to teammates to get the puck out of the zone was maddening when comparing them to us. Watching them skate to cover the point men was maddening to watch compared with us. Watching them create so many scoring chances compared to our constipated system was maddening to watch. We don't really know what the true quality of talent the Rangers have, because it was all dumbed down by the idiotic Tortorella system. Heck.......these teams actually passed the puck IN THE MIDDLE OF THEIR DEFENSIVE ZONE! Imagine that!

Ha, thats pretty funny.

It doesnt take a rocket scientist to see that the Rangers talent level/depth pails in comparison to the 4 teams you listed.

 

[pld459666]

I am neither a Torts supporter or hater. I think he is a good coach, but he is easily replaceable. That is because they all are.

Now that Boston has wasted Pittsburgh, isn't it apparent to most people that the reason the Rangers loss to the Bruins had nothing to do with their coach?

Is their anyone out there who believes that Rangers personnel is better than Pittsburgh, aside from goaltender?

The Rangers put up a much more competitive series than Pitt did. Yes, they only won one game, but Pitt looked totally overmatched. The Rangers didn't.

Those of you who criticized Nash during the series would now be screaming that Crosby and Malkin suck if you were Penguins fans.

The Rangers finished up about where they should have, despite all the crying and moaning throughout this site. In the thread speculating about who should coach next, we have people explaining that this coach would be a great choice or a terrible choice without having a clue how any coach will end up doing.

To me, it's funny watching a fan say that his choice will be a "great fit" or a disaster that will wreak havoc on our city. Face it, none of us has a clue how a coach will work out, and my very minority opinion is that barring the very rare exception of incompetence, it doesn't matter in the least who is chosen to run the show.

What matters most is the GM and luck.

On an unrelated matter, Krug is the real deal. Let me know when you come around on that one, Inferno.

I've said it from day one. The match up with Bruins for some reason favored the Rangers. What the Bruins did to pitt has no bearing on that

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

You realize all of 4 teams make it past the 2nd round, right? Not sure who thinks this team should be mandated for the finals. I'm also not sure how you equate not making the final four with being chicken ****.

Please enlighten me. Are we not looking at this team through a championship caliber prism?

We have a good team here - a mediocre team without their great goaltender. But if you're expecting a championship with a roster similar to this one, and think a new coach is the only thing standing in the way, well, thats delusional.

 

[skillhockey]

Toronto pushed Boston to the limit. Does that have a bearing on the Pens or Rangers? I don't think so but if you're looking for a conclusion, maybe it means that Randy Carlyle is a better coach than Torts or Bylsma. I'd agree with that.

Boston played bad vs Toronto, but like usually, when team gets over a bad series, they do better.

 

[chosen]

Yeah because Seguin, Horton, and Jagr are Selke candidates. The Bruins have plenty of guys who are out there primarily to create offense. That completely changes the way defenses have to play them. With the Rangers, you stop Nash you stop the team.

Jagr as Selke candidate? Are you confusing him with Bergeron?

 

[chosen]

They don't collapse. They shoot on the net. They practice offense.

It'd work beautifully on the Rangers if the definition of "more complete" was in fact "more complete" and not "solely defense".

Just going on the offensive does not make one a gifted offensive player. There is no equivalent of Seguin, Marchand, Bergeron, Jagr, Krug, Chara, etc,.

To play an offensive game you need offensively gifted players. That the Bruins have those players and that they dedicate themselves to defense makes them win. The Rangers are dedicated to defense, but when they go on offense, not much happens.

Look at the scoring Boston has gotten from their defensemen and 4th liners and and compare that to their counterparts on the Rangers. It's quite the gap.

Again, I am not saying that firing Torts was a bad thing, but if anyone believes that if the Bruins and Rangers switched coaches that there would have been a different outcome, I couldn't disagree more.

 

[chosen]

One could argue PIT lost because of their coach too.

One could argue anything.

The goal posts hurt Pitt more than the coaching.

 

[chosen]

hy·per·bo·le
/hīˈpərbəlē/

Noun
Exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally.

Which is exactly what it was, it was based on the reports that the team was unhappy with Torts, in one of them the reporter used the phrase "roadblock to success".

So again, are you going to leave it alone, or should we continue bickering about something I already edited, admitted to it being sarcasm/hyperbole, and never claimed to be real?

There does seem to be no point.

 

[chosen]

I love it - according to Rangers fans it was all in spite of the coach and it's going to be nothing but sunshine and rainbows from here on out.

My question: Who will you blame next year when the team fails to meet your unreasonable expectations?

Based on history, I vote for a defenseman to be named later.

 

[chosen]

And Tortorella not adjusting to his offense didn't help either. He could have made better decisions with his players.

Could you be specific?

 

[GarretJoseph*]

I don't believe Torts got dumped because he lost to Boston. The only thing IMO that would have saved Torts job was the stanley cup. He got dumped for non results reasons.

 

[chosen]

How would you know if we have any offensive talent on the blueline when we have a coach that preaches getting the puck off the glass and out?

It comes from watching them play.

I believe that McDonagh might become a good second option as an offensive weapon. I don't see anyone who will ever become a first option.

Del Zotto was supposed to be that and I can't say it won't happen, but in this era you no longer have to wait for defensemen to display consistent offensive skills, so I don't like his chances. No one else on the roster has any chance.