Post-Game Talk: Rangers @ Ducks: The "5, Bazooka, or Juicy Fruit?" Edition

[Clown Fiesta]

In some ways it was.

The we're a really bad team kind of statement. We just don't have enough talent to compete.

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

The we're a really bad team kind of statement. We just don't have enough talent to compete.

I honestly don't know what to think at this point. We've seen 90% of this roster compete. I do have to wonder if this current roster is the right make up to play AV's system.

There was a popular comment that Torts was trying to put a round peg in a square hole (not saying agreed with the comment). So they changed the hole— but is the new hole round shape?

I'm done metaphoring myself into a corner.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

I honestly don't know what to think at this point. We've seen 90% of this roster compete. I do have to wonder if this current roster is the right make up to play AV's system.

There was a popular comment that Torts was trying to put a round peg in a square hole (not saying agreed with the comment). So they changed the hole— but is the new hole round shape?

I'm done metaphoring myself into a corner.

Yep. I never got that impression with Torts, and I thought it was unfair to make that kind of snap judgment with the weird lockout year.

I thought Torts' early tenure in his first full season have a lot of similarities with what we're seeing now, although not on such a hideous scale. People forget he tried to open it up early on - he tried to be Mr. Safe is Death, and it failed. He adapted from that point and never really abandoned the gritty, shot blocking, counter punching type of style.

Vigneault is in the midst of getting the same cold dose of reality when it comes to what this roster is really capable of. I feel bad for AV in a way, as he came in with a mandate to open things up even though it sure seems like this team is a disaster when it comes to employing that sort of gameplan. Does he change course at risk of making Sather look like even more of an idiot? Its a tough situation for him to walk into.

 

[Thordic]

This team will not compete unless (1) of Kreider/Miller comes up and hits their ceiling, book it.

Miller's ceiling is Mike Richards. Mike Richards couldn't fix this team.

Kreider's ceiling is Tony Amonte. Amonte couldn't fix this team.

A kid isn't going to be this team's salvation, nor are either of the above likely to hit their ceiling overnight.

The team as a whole needs to get their **** together.

 

[BroadwayBlues]

Yep. I never got that impression with Torts, and I thought it was unfair to make that kind of snap judgment with the weird lockout year.

I thought Torts' early tenure in his first full season have a lot of similarities with what we're seeing now, although not on such a hideous scale. People forget he tried to open it up early on - he tried to be Mr. Safe is Death, and it failed. He adapted from that point and never really abandoned the gritty, shot blocking, counter punching type of style.

Vigneault is in the midst of getting the same cold dose of reality when it comes to what this roster is really capable of. I feel bad for AV in a way, as he came in with a mandate to open things up even though it sure seems like this team is a disaster when it comes to employing that sort of gameplan. Does he change course at risk of making Sather look like even more of an idiot? Its a tough situation for him to walk into.

This! Different personnel but it reminds me of when Tortorella was first hired and he tried to employ the "safe is death" system and the team looked completely lost. Very similar.

 

[Clown Fiesta]

I honestly don't know what to think at this point. We've seen 90% of this roster compete. I do have to wonder if this current roster is the right make up to play AV's system.

There was a popular comment that Torts was trying to put a round peg in a square hole (not saying agreed with the comment). So they changed the hole— but is the new hole round shape?

I'm done metaphoring myself into a corner.

I don't think this team is a peg of any kind, maybe a wet noodle? Won't go anywhere you want it to regardless of what angle you try.

I really think the best way to send a statement is to ship out someone of significance. Someone who has been with the team long enough to feel comfortable and has earned respect from their teammates... Not entirely sure who considering the only three I can think of are Staal, Girardi, and Callahan.

What that does IMO is sends the message that no one is safe, heck you might even get someone that can contribute to the team.

I have a hard time buying it's AV's fault, they didn't play great for Torts last year. It's a personnel or leadership issue inside the locker room. Bag skates are all but banned now a days so I don't know how else you send the message.

 

[mrhockey193195]

I don't think this team is a peg of any kind, maybe a wet noodle? Won't go anywhere you want it to regardless of what angle you try.

I really think the best way to send a statement is to ship out someone of significance. Someone who has been with the team long enough to feel comfortable and has earned respect from their teammates... Not entirely sure who considering the only three I can think of are Staal, Girardi, and Callahan.

What that does IMO is sends the message that no one is safe, heck you might even get someone that can contribute to the team.

I have a hard time buying it's AV's fault, they didn't play great for Torts last year. It's a personnel or leadership issue inside the locker room. Bag skates are all but banned now a days so I don't know how else you send the message.

If you ship someone that important out, you run the risk that the remaining players won't care anymore if they stay in NY...the reverse effect of what you had intended.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

I don't think this team is a peg of any kind, maybe a wet noodle? Won't go anywhere you want it to regardless of what angle you try.

I really think the best way to send a statement is to ship out someone of significance. Someone who has been with the team long enough to feel comfortable and has earned respect from their teammates... Not entirely sure who considering the only three I can think of are Staal, Girardi, and Callahan.

What that does IMO is sends the message that no one is safe, heck you might even get someone that can contribute to the team.

I have a hard time buying it's AV's fault, they didn't play great for Torts last year. It's a personnel or leadership issue inside the locker room. Bag skates are all but banned now a days so I don't know how else you send the message.

I wouldnt mind seeing what they could get for Girardi. He was built for Torts hockey, and I cant see him getting back to where he once was. He also still likely has some perceived value around the league that could net something legitimate.

 

[LieutenantLackluster]

it reminds me of when Tortorella was first hired and he tried to employ the "safe is death" system and the team looked completely lost. Very similar.

Remind me when was that team outscored 15-2 in 2 games.

 

[Clown Fiesta]

If you ship someone that important out, you run the risk that the remaining players won't care anymore if they stay in NY...the reverse effect of what you had intended.

Then you end up in the same place you're currently in results wise. Regardless our current roster needs to be improved upon, we don't have many assets that will net us a good enough return to make the trade anything more than a lateral move. Trading the Boyle's, Pyatt's, and Asham's of the world only gets you more Boyle's, Pyatt's, and Asham's.

I wouldnt mind seeing what they could get for Girardi. He was built for Torts hockey, and I cant see him getting back to where he once was. He also still likely has some perceived value around the league that could net something legitimate.

Girardi would probably be the best option, but who do you replace him with? We don't have a position of strength at this point so it's hard to come up with a solution.

 

[Raspewtin]

I wouldnt mind seeing what they could get for Girardi. He was built for Torts hockey, and I cant see him getting back to where he once was. He also still likely has some perceived value around the league that could net something legitimate.

I agree but like BU said we don't have anyone to immediately fill that void. Conor Allen? Doubtful.....it's a nice thought though. Either way, I strongly doubt Girardi is a Ranger next year.

 

[Fitzy]

Girardi would be a trade candidate were it not for his extensive resume with the team, as well as our relative dearth of right handed defensemen.

I do, however, think Sather might consider moving a piece for a scoring forward at some point. Right now, Zuccarello has not got the job done at all.

It's early. I wouldn't expect a trade until 20-30 games in, and thats if things continue the way they have been.

Remember, its not any one guy here. This is a whole team playing very poorly because of a new system. Typically very dependable guys are coughing up the puck left and right.

 

[Riverdale]

I have a hard time buying it's AV's fault, they didn't play great for Torts last year. It's a personnel or leadership issue inside the locker room. Bag skates are all but banned now a days so I don't know how else you send the message.

It gives me a headache to see Richards in an A.

 

[aufheben]

I agree but like BU said we don't have anyone to immediately fill that void. Conor Allen? Doubtful.....it's a nice thought though. Either way, I strongly doubt Girardi is a Ranger next year.

You can trade him for another RH defensemen. Not sure I see Sather trading Girardi, though.

 

[Samuel Culper III]

Girardi would be a trade candidate were it not for his extensive resume with the team, as well as our relative dearth of right handed defensemen.

I do, however, think Sather might consider moving a piece for a scoring forward at some point. Right now, Zuccarello has not got the job done at all.

It's early. I wouldn't expect a trade until 20-30 games in, and thats if things continue the way they have been.

Remember, its not any one guy here. This is a whole team playing very poorly because of a new system. Typically very dependable guys are coughing up the puck left and right.

See, this is where I become confused. What makes everyone so convinced this is some monstrous learning curve for a new system? I played competitive hockey right through college. Does learning a new coach's system make you incapable of making a good read? Does it make you confused as to what is and isn't a good pass? If you're the lone defender facing down an attacker one on one, do you play him differently in AV's system than you did in Torts'? Or do you just do what works in most of these situations? This talk of "systems" is so vastly overblown that I almost can't stand it anymore. A coach's "system" is NOT something that effects every fundamental aspect of your game. A coach's system can change defensive zone coverage and how you breakout of your zone and transition up the ice. And YES, those things can create some big ripple effects in your game. But a new system DOESN'T stop guys like Girardi, McDonagh and Staal from winning battles in the corners and on the boards that they used to win, or from being able to read and anticipate a backdoor play like they used to, or from knowing how to handle a 2 on 1 down low, or from knowing what a safe pass is and what's going to get turned right back down your throat. I just can't attribute the majority of our problems to the system right now. To me, that's a major cop out.

 

[aufheben]

AV and Torts have polar opposite systems. I think that has a great deal to do with it. The fact that even without injuries we don't have as talented a group as Vancouver, worsens things a lot.

 

[Tawnos]

I'm as upset as anyone about these two games, but I still see this as an adjustment problem. 4 games is basically as early as 3. Still won't panic until November.

 

[Fitzy]

See, this is where I become confused. What makes everyone so convinced this is some monstrous learning curve for a new system? I played competitive hockey right through college. Does learning a new coach's system make you incapable of making a good read? Does it make you confused as to what is and isn't a good pass? If you're the lone defender facing down an attacker one on one, do you play him differently in AV's system than you did in Torts'? Or do you just do what works in most of these situations? This talk of "systems" is so vastly overblown that I almost can't stand it anymore. A coach's "system" is NOT something that effects every fundamental aspect of your game. A coach's system can change defensive zone coverage and how you breakout of your zone and transition up the ice. And YES, those things can create some big ripple effects in your game. But a new system DOESN'T stop guys like Girardi, McDonagh and Staal from winning battles in the corners and on the boards that they used to win, or from being able to read and anticipate a backdoor play like they used to, or from knowing how to handle a 2 on 1 down low, or from knowing what a safe pass is and what's going to get turned right back down your throat. I just can't attribute the majority of our problems to the system right now. To me, that's a major cop out.

I played through college as well.

I have a couple points here. First, you are right, a new system shouldn't make everyone play as badly as they have. There has never been just one causal factor behind any change. But...

The higher level you play, the harder it is to change systems. This was a group that had gotten very good at Tortorella's scheme, and while it didn't work out in the end, the Rangers had been playing deeper and deeper, more and more conservatively over the years, which brings me to my next point.

The longer you play a scheme, the harder it is to break. The defensemen on this team, a lot of them flourished under Tortorella. We didn't s core much, but I did call into question whether the way the Torts system worked coddled our defensemen, and I may have been right on that one. I wondered whether the propensity towards deflection goals under Tortorella hurt Henrik, and that may have been incorrect.

I could say we're on the road, the guys are in a bad run of form, and that we've had bad luck. But really, you can't chalk everything up to it. But unlike the lads here, I don't think the team has miraculously become pants over the course of an offseason.

 

[JohnC]

It gives me a headache to see Richards in an A.

Why? He's the only skater playing well imo

 

[Riverdale]

Why? He's the only skater playing well imo

True but because of last year I can never see him as a leader.

 

[Samuel Culper III]

I played through college as well.

I have a couple points here. First, you are right, a new system shouldn't make everyone play as badly as they have. There has never been just one causal factor behind any change. But...

The higher level you play, the harder it is to change systems. This was a group that had gotten very good at Tortorella's scheme, and while it didn't work out in the end, the Rangers had been playing deeper and deeper, more and more conservatively over the years, which brings me to my next point.

The longer you play a scheme, the harder it is to break. The defensemen on this team, a lot of them flourished under Tortorella. We didn't s core much, but I did call into question whether the way the Torts system worked coddled our defensemen, and I may have been right on that one. I wondered whether the propensity towards deflection goals under Tortorella hurt Henrik, and that may have been incorrect.

I could say we're on the road, the guys are in a bad run of form, and that we've had bad luck. But really, you can't chalk everything up to it. But unlike the lads here, I don't think the team has miraculously become pants over the course of an offseason.

I can agree with all of this, but the fear that keeps cropping up for me is that, not only did Torts' system potentially inflate our defense but that Torts himself kind of propped up a team that, outside of some obvious guys (Cally, G, Hags) simply isn't that driven. It's obviously something that's very difficult to quantify, but I wouldn't be shocked by the notion that Torts was so demanding because he HAD to be in order to keep these guys on task. There's also the fact that, while Cally's play is typically exemplary and he leads by example, I don't think many believe he's a very vocal leader. That's okay when you have a vocal leader in the room in the form of a coach like Torts, but what happens when that vocal personality who gets emotionally excited is taken away? You end up with a captain not dissimilar from Chris Drury (who was a great player in his prime, but perhaps not the best captain we've ever had). So I agree with a lot of what you say, but I also think, unfortunately, with Torts no longer breathing down their necks, some of these guys are letting their hair down and showing their true colors a bit, and it's disappointing to say the least.

 

[bubba5]

I would like to know who thought the Banff Follies along with 4 games in 5 nights was a good idea after bringing in a new coach and system?

How else does Sather get a free vacation.

 

[True Blue]

This was supposed to a be a statement game....

Mission accomplished. It was quite a statement.

 

[Ian]

You'd think if AV wanted to install a D-man pass breakout system, that they'd ensure at least one defensemen on this team was semi-competent at doing that consistently.

Girardi handles the puck like a hand grenade, MDZ can't seem to comprehend a basic gameplan, and the rest of the group doesn't seem much better.

They either need to back up the forwards so they aren't already at the red line or beyond once the d passes their own hashmarks (which seems like the exact way half of these turnovers have led into goals), or bring in someone who can make that pass.

 

[TGWL]

The best is when they stand behind the net, then try and long pass up the ice, which as worked once, and that was when Gaborik scored a beautiful goal.

Lets not complain about dumping the puck, because Stepan is turning it over by not choosing to dump the puck.

Hank is never going to be Hank when the team quits on him before he has a chance to make saves he should be making. The score is getting out of hand because he's not standing on his head for every shot that comes his way. He's never going to get in the groove with this team playing like this. Henrik was never great with shaking goals off. He always had a confidence problem because he spends too much time thinking about the goal he gave up, his fault or not.

AV had a lot of success in Vancouver, but he also had more offensively skilled players, who were capable of making 3 quick tic-tac passes to get out of the zone and create a breakout. I really don't think he did much as a coach there. Rangers clearly don't have the IQ needed here.

Players need to start shooting wide on purpose. If you can't get a shot through, don't take it. I'm looking at you Del Zotto.

Funny that Staal looked good until they put him back with Girardi, who has been clueless on where to be.