Speculation: Rangers Head Coach Search (Laviolette being finalized? According to Vince and Friedman)

[EdJovanovski]

 

[RangersFan1994]

He has been one of the worst GM ever in NHL history

 

[TheWrongWay]

My point was in order to judge him against other NHL coaches , wouldn't he have had to play with other NHL coaches, and not against high school and pee wee coaches?

That would make sense to me except the guy you quoted just said the best coach he played for. He didn't say his buddy claimed he was the best coach in the NHL.

Your first few sentences were legit counter-points. But my take is, if that dude really knows someone who did play for Laviolette, then his buddy has more first-hand experience with Laviolette's coaching than pretty much all of us.

That's not to say his statement has any more weight than that, but it did provide a first-hand perspective probably close to none of us have on Laviolette.

 

[Brutananadilewski]

He has been one of the worst GM ever in NHL history

 

[Profet]

He has been one of the worst GM ever in NHL history

 

[Tob]

Some part of brooksies insistence on Sullivan is from Dolan, 15% chance.

John Hynes is being used as leverage against Laviolette to keep the salary down after firing Gallant after only 2 years.

Larry's tweet about how Drury not signing Laviolette last week being an indication of Drury's luke warm feelings for Laviolette.

Lavi seems to be the guy. Just a matter of term. He had a big boy contract with Washington and is looking for a handsome salary with a big market team like the Rangers.

Drury is trying to balance the books.

 

[Bacon Artemi Bravo]

View attachment 714307

*pic of mike milbury but I'll spare our eyeballs*

 

[PredsV82]

I would rather have Hynes than Laviolette. I remember Elliotte Friedman kept mentioning Nashville might make a change. He played with Drury at BU. Hynes doesn't come with his own version of Kevin McCarthy. The Rangers hire Hynes as head coach. The Rangers put Knoblauch on the staff. Hire a coach to help the defenseman. A young guy. The Devils and Nashville had young players on their team. Hynes had a good AHL record. His teams always won at least one playoff round. He inherited a mess in Jersey. Hischier and Bratt broke into the NHL under Hynes. Hall had his MVP season under Hynes. Coleman. Severson. Zacha. Jeannot. Carrier. Trenin. Tomasino. Novak. His teams in Nashville made the playoffs in his first two full seasons. They traded the entire team at the deadline and Nashville still nearly made the playoffs.

If you will permit a Preds fan to share the generally accepted opinion on Hynes amongst our fanbase... he was absolutely stifling of the young talent. He much preferred tweener plugs.
He completely ran off Tolvanen, and Tomasino has regressed under him. Most of the credit for our young players success belongs to Karl Taylor(who many of us wanted hired).

 

[duhmetreE]

Structure wise if we can implement what Seattle did, we'd be golden.

Defenders move the puck
Talent gets coached up
Kids start realizing potential

Who knows, we may overperform

I've been Leach Boudreau from day 1.

 

[Lindberg Cheese]

If Ron Low or Bryan Trottier aren’t available, I’d just go with the fattest guy available.

 

[RangersFan1994]

Who is still with the organization

 

[Brutananadilewski]

Who is still with the organization

And any association Drury has with this franchise (As a player, working in the office) is thanks to this man.

 

[Synergy27]

Structure wise if we can implement what Seattle did, we'd be golden.

Defenders move the puck
Talent gets coached up
Kids start realizing potential

Who knows, we may overperform

I've been Leach Boudreau from day 1.

I don’t know why the “obvious” hire is so obvious. There’s this whole notion that if Drury hires a retread and the retread fails, Drury will be spared his job. Why?

To me this is a no brainer decision. You take the young guy, who just played a key role in creating a major overachievement by an expansion team, and adapt that to a legitimately talented roster.

This isn’t rocket science.

 

[McRanger92]

I don’t know why the “obvious” hire is so obvious. There’s this whole notion that if Drury hires a retread and the retread fails, Drury will be spared his job. Why?

To me this is a no brainer decision. You take the young guy, who just played a key role in creating a major overachievement by an expansion team, and adapt that to a legitimately talented roster.

This isn’t rocket science.

I think the idea is Drury would prefer to entrust his job to a guy he has a relationship with and has done the job before. It’s what everyone here would do in the same position lol.

 

[LiveLongandProspal]

If Ron Low or Bryan Trottier aren’t available, I’d just go with the fattest guy available.

Boudreau?

 

[Paulie Walnutz]

Gallant when he gets hired by Calgary @EdJovanovski

 

[TopShelfSnipes]

If you will permit a Preds fan to share the generally accepted opinion on Hynes amongst our fanbase... he was absolutely stifling of the young talent. He much preferred tweener plugs.
He completely ran off Tolvanen, and Tomasino has regressed under him. Most of the credit for our young players success belongs to Karl Taylor(who many of us wanted hired).

Thanks for sharing your thoughts - just a general observation here for fellow NYR fans:
It's beyond frustrating that this is the book on every front runner candidate so far.
This is the opposite of what this team needs, and a continuation of what this team just fired.

 

[2014nyr]

Boudreau?

did ken hitchcock bite the radish?

 

[Paulie Walnutz]

Looks like he’s going back to Columbus @EdJovanovski

 

[2014nyr]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts - just a general observation here for fellow NYR fans:
It's beyond frustrating that this is the book on every front runner candidate so far.
This is the opposite of what this team needs, and a continuation of what this team just fired.

not saying this isn't necessarily true, but people need to keep in mind this is basically a criticism of every single coach that's been fired from a previous job. a big part of that probably has something to do with fan bases thinking they have some amazing young players coming up, and why the era under that coach failed was they never took off.

i don't know if i've seen any retread candidate where the book on them was how much they did for young players. we hired quinn specifically to work with young players and on his way out a lot of people criticized his work with them. like if we hired leach everyone would be thrilled because he has a solid reputation and he has no negative history to pick at, but 30 games in fans may already be on him if laf and kakko weren't thriving.

personally i would honestly prefer drury go with leach or a marc savard, and i really wanted brunette, but it's important to keep in mind the lack of negative history attached doesn't mean much for the future. though i really don't want him, hynes had tremendous success at the us program working with young players there and was a big part of why he was originally hired. now he has an nhl track record that hasn't gone well and this is the new narrative.

long story short, new is exciting because all we see is the upside and success at lower levels. that said, almost every coach got their first nhl gig with the same reputation coming in, and many very successful coaches failed multiple times before they found success.

 

[RangersFan1994]

View attachment 714351

Looks like he’s going back to Columbus @EdJovanovski

Source?

 

[Paulie Walnutz]

Source?

I guess I needed to add the sarcasm emoji

 

[Dfence033]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts - just a general observation here for fellow NYR fans:
It's beyond frustrating that this is the book on every front runner candidate so far.
This is the opposite of what this team needs, and a continuation of what this team just fired.

Maybe that's because it's easier to blame a coach for the "best player not in the NHL" as rated by super-homer fans on a website dedicated to prospects not becoming the reincarnation of Jagr, Gretzky, Hull, Orr, and Hasek combined.

Ask the fans of every team not Vegas or Florida right now how they feel about their coach's treatment of their best prospects. I'm willing to bet that the answers are as follows:

(XXX) ONLY plays plugs and useless grinders on the top 3 lines.

(XXX) HATES young players like (bust #1, bust #2, 4th-round pick who went on 15-game a bender 4 years ago). They are never given the opportunities that the lazy, plug vets like (leading scorer #1, the complimentary winger who plays defensive coverage for half the salary he should because salary cap, guy who got severely hurt at 34 years old).

(XXX) Has no system, and isn't an "X's and O's" guy. That's all his (young, perceived up-and-coming assistants). All faults of the team are the head coach's.

(XXX) Doesn't make adjustments in the playoffs. Why did (underperforming player 1, 2, 3) not lead the team to the Cup? They were either injured because the coach played them too hard, or checked out because the coach is a moron, or the coach didn't change the entire structure of his system and team composition when faced with a team that is also very good.


Do these sound familiar? I'm not super high on Hynes, or Lav, or anyone, but it'll be the same BS with whomever the Rangers hire. It's just a matter of how long it takes. Which, unsurprisingly, is directly tied to "Did we win?"

 

[gravey9]

I don't know why Renney gets so much shit on these boards - not a great coach but we have had WAY worse. Muckler immediately leaps to mind.

Renney was top 5 NYR coach in last 35 years. Only Torts, Roger Nielsen and maaaaaybe Keenan. AV when he started. Lots of garbage otherwise.

 

[TopShelfSnipes]

Maybe that's because it's easier to blame a coach for the "best player not in the NHL" as rated by super-homer fans on a website dedicated to prospects not becoming the reincarnation of Jagr, Gretzky, Hull, Orr, and Hasek combined.

Ask the fans of every team not Vegas or Florida right now how they feel about their coach's treatment of their best prospects. I'm willing to bet that the answers are as follows:

(XXX) ONLY plays plugs and useless grinders on the top 3 lines.

(XXX) HATES young players like (bust #1, bust #2, 4th-round pick who went on 15-game a bender 4 years ago). They are never given the opportunities that the lazy, plug vets like (leading scorer #1, the complimentary winger who plays defensive coverage for half the salary he should because salary cap, guy who got severely hurt at 34 years old).

(XXX) Has no system, and isn't an "X's and O's" guy. That's all his (young, perceived up-and-coming assistants). All faults of the team are the head coach's.

(XXX) Doesn't make adjustments in the playoffs. Why did (underperforming player 1, 2, 3) not lead the team to the Cup? They were either injured because the coach played them too hard, or checked out because the coach is a moron, or the coach didn't change the entire structure of his system and team composition when faced with a team that is also very good.


Do these sound familiar? I'm not super high on Hynes, or Lav, or anyone, but it'll be the same BS with whomever the Rangers hire. It's just a matter of how long it takes. Which, unsurprisingly, is directly tied to "Did we win?"

A reasonable coach would have looked at the body of the game when Kreider Zibanejad and Kakko were extremely effective at the beginning of last year, and let those 3 play together all year.

With Kakko getting 18 minutes a night, if he still scored 40 points, you wouldn't be seeing much about the coach.

But considering Jimmy Vesey spent half the season in the Top 6 I'd very much say there's a valid argument.

Teams commit tons of resources to highly touted picks - why not let them try and fail and maybe even succeed? To be clear, when I say "develop" it's not strictly determined by on ice results - it's also based on deployment and how coaches use the young guys. This isn't about them being "blocked" either - Laf was asked to change position to be in the top 6, did so, and got less than 10 games up there. Kakko went into the season as the 1RW and was down to the third line by 10 games in. Neither player did anything wrong, but the coach wanted to "shake things up" which meant putting grinders like Goodrow and Vesey higher in the lineup. The end result was that Kakko and Laf both got lost on the bench in the middle part of the season, and only a strong finish to the season made their numbers respectable in the end. Since the team is committed to the Kreider curve for developing young forwards, this means they should be good in, oh, about another decade or so.

I don't want another coach that's going to repeat these mistakes. The core is older, the window is closing or closed already. Play the kids 18+ minutes a night and with a representative share of PP time and let the chips fall where they may. Not every bad start to a game requires shuffling the lines around.

As for the fan rants you fictitiously present at the end, that's true of all THESE coaches. But there are plenty of fanbases - Devils, Toronto, Ottawa, etc. that I'd bet the fans would absolutely say they're hapy with how their kids have been handled, and that the problems lie elsewhere.