If Drury brings in another guy like Gallant, it means he doesn't think the players were the problem. If he brings in the opposite of Gallant (whatever that is), I have to believe he's not happy with how the roster performed.
Speculation: Rangers Head Coach Search (Laviolette being finalized? According to Vince and Friedman)
- Thread starter EdJovanovski
- 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
I mean it doesn't really help that the Rangers are basically swimming around for an option in a pile of garbage but I'm really going to enjoy watching the bloom fall off of the Brunette rose in the coming years.
Dude is so overrated.
Dude is so overrated.
JHS
Registered User
- Oct 11, 2013
- 1,690
- 1,288
But they are replacing him potentially with another coach who has essentially exactly the same track record in the NHL- Laviolette stays with teams slightly longer than Gallant but he's not exactly Barry Trotz who coaches one team for several seasons. That was my point- the organization is replacing him( potentially) with exactly the same type of coach...it's not hard logic here to understand why that would be laughable.
Yup that's exactly my point. Firing a coach who had success with this team makes no sense if you are going to make a lateral move or even a downgrade at the coaching position. That logic seems to escape most of the people here though.
LiveLongandProspal
NY Rangers = America's Team
tlk
hARry kane comeS homE
That Preemptive Civil Arrest thinghahaha, @EdJovanovski is already arresting, Lavi
tlk
hARry kane comeS homE
LiveLongandProspal
NY Rangers = America's Team
tlk
hARry kane comeS homE
Yep and Dubas still needs to hire a GM.. Guess the wait continues.
Yet if Keefe is free, who knows
Drury is in so far over his head its not even funny.
He does realize teams like columbus, calgary and anaheim are also looking for coaches.
He has no clue what he wants to do and it shows through all his signings and trades so far.
He is a disaster of a gm and should have been fired along with gallant
He does realize teams like columbus, calgary and anaheim are also looking for coaches.
He has no clue what he wants to do and it shows through all his signings and trades so far.
He is a disaster of a gm and should have been fired along with gallant
haveandare
Registered User
I wouldn’t entrust my job to someone who has no recent success regardless of my relationship with them. Experience isn’t helpful if it’s experience sucking, which is what both of these rumored top candidates have
eco's bones
Registered User
My read on Laviolette is he's more hands on than Gallant. Gerard at least after his first year seemed to think the team could run itself.....or at least outside the games. Laviolette is more about asserting control and more about discipline. Just having someone different in any case is going to change the dynamic around the team.
I don't read all that much into Laviolette's time in Washington. To me that was an aging group and one that was seriously prone to injury---particularly last year was just one key player after another. The Caps do have some younger guys that will be moving in in the next year or two though. That's why Carberry is probably a good fit for them.
Not sure Laviolette will be a good fit for us. It's possible but there are better choices IMO. As far as jumping on someone now because of what other teams might do.....really don't see the point to that.
I don't read all that much into Laviolette's time in Washington. To me that was an aging group and one that was seriously prone to injury---particularly last year was just one key player after another. The Caps do have some younger guys that will be moving in in the next year or two though. That's why Carberry is probably a good fit for them.
Not sure Laviolette will be a good fit for us. It's possible but there are better choices IMO. As far as jumping on someone now because of what other teams might do.....really don't see the point to that.
LiveLongandProspal
NY Rangers = America's Team
Was Hynes also at fault for Tolvanen's disappointing 2 AHL seasons, where he scored roughly 0.5 points per game? Or his disappointing 2nd Jokerit stint where he barely cracked 0.5PPG after raising his stock so much 3 years earlier with >0.75PPG?
And yet, here we are, confirming my earlier point. "If Tolvanen was only given a chance!" He might be the next in a long line of hugely disappointing prospects who turned it around after literally being given away, but it's not likely coaching. He could be the next J.T. Miller, but Miller was never going to be a 100 point player in NY or TB. He could also be a disappointment who went on a 30-game heater that was still barely enough to replicate his best in Nashville.
And "he wouldn't have played Novak if not for the injuries or trades." No kidding. You mean he wouldn't play a guy who had 7 points in 27 games just last season? Who had a career high in the AHL of 42 points (in 60 games) 4 seasons ago? A guy who looks like he may have finally found the secret at age 26... this season? Burn the man (Hynes) at the stake!
I'm a Preds fan second, and follow the team closely. But this is the exact stuff I mean when this place "evaluates" coaches. It's all the same.
savebyrichter94
I’m No Longer Here
I was pretty sure that’s how it went down but this old brain of mine don’t work like it used to if it ever worked at all haha
And yea pretty scummy I agree
I am listening to the Jeff Marek show live. Elliotte Friedman said the Rangers have brought in candidates for 2nd interviews this week. Apparently, Laviolette was not meeting with Drury on Tuesday. It could today or tomorrow or whenever. He wasn’t sure when that meeting is taking place.
Hopefully, never.
Anyone over Laviolette.
Hopefully, never.
Anyone over Laviolette.
i kinda think this, but then again i still think he might be very good. either way, he's going to fall on the extremes in the end. either really good or disaster. i mean he completely gutted and replaced all of hockey ops/scouting etc...so everything is ultimately a total reflection of his decision making.
i don't think his trades have been too bad, several have worked out really well, none were excessive overpayment. he inherited a cap nightmare with a lot of ntc's and an anchor contract that basically can't be bought out. his signings have been reasonable money wise to date, and only one true misfire in nemeth - which i think was more about fit than a bad player.
but his deadlines have been bipolar, and to date drafting/development hasn't done anything to write home about. he picked his coach then needed to move on after just 2 years. the obvious shortcoming of the roster - some speed and pace - has really had little effort to address outside motte when cheap options are all over.
he's still very close to assembling an elite team with a good summer. he's also very close to where the whole thing is forced to go kablooey if he botches his coach decision and makes even 1 or 2 poor roster decisions this summer.
This kind of begs the question...
Who else did they bring in for round 2? Even for all of the Hynes hysteria people it couldn't possibly have been him since he just became available.
I totally disagree that Drury is in over his head, unless you can say the same about every other GM who does not bring home a Cup. Not to say that I don't disagree with him many times.
It is a tough job without a given template for success, the reason why GMs seem to be fired as much as coaches are.
What I do think is that this is not the best year to hire a coach and when the decision was made to fire Gallant (a decision I agreed with), reality hit and hit strongly. Did the reality of a poor coach market factor at all into the decision? Was firing GG so necessary that Drury felt he would deal with the fallout later? I have no clue and none of us really do.
Yes, he has played with the idea of hiring a first time coach (and that is the way I would go) but in his situation with this team, at this time, with this owner, with the history of the last few years, that was an unlikely scenario.
He is left with an uninspired group of retread coaches. Hynes (meh). Laviolette (meh). Q and Babcock (not going to happen). Roy (tempting but does he really want to tempt fate?) Keefe and Sullivan (intriguing but unlikely).
Of course he knows that other teams need coaches. Of course he knows what other teams are thinking...he doesn't exist in a vacuum.
Coaches are usually hired to bring a certain skill set to a team; one that the team lacks or that was not a strong suit of the previous coach.
What is upsetting about the process this year, is that there is not an obvious, slam dunk candidate out there. By process of elimination, we're likely going to end up with Laviolette. Inspiring? No. What we need? Who knows? Is there a better choice among veteran coaches? Probably not.
The whole thing is disconcerting. It was exciting when we hired Torts. Same with AV. Same with DQ. Same with GG. No matter who we hire, it is guaranteed not to be exciting. And that is upsetting.
It is a tough job without a given template for success, the reason why GMs seem to be fired as much as coaches are.
What I do think is that this is not the best year to hire a coach and when the decision was made to fire Gallant (a decision I agreed with), reality hit and hit strongly. Did the reality of a poor coach market factor at all into the decision? Was firing GG so necessary that Drury felt he would deal with the fallout later? I have no clue and none of us really do.
Yes, he has played with the idea of hiring a first time coach (and that is the way I would go) but in his situation with this team, at this time, with this owner, with the history of the last few years, that was an unlikely scenario.
He is left with an uninspired group of retread coaches. Hynes (meh). Laviolette (meh). Q and Babcock (not going to happen). Roy (tempting but does he really want to tempt fate?) Keefe and Sullivan (intriguing but unlikely).
Of course he knows that other teams need coaches. Of course he knows what other teams are thinking...he doesn't exist in a vacuum.
Coaches are usually hired to bring a certain skill set to a team; one that the team lacks or that was not a strong suit of the previous coach.
What is upsetting about the process this year, is that there is not an obvious, slam dunk candidate out there. By process of elimination, we're likely going to end up with Laviolette. Inspiring? No. What we need? Who knows? Is there a better choice among veteran coaches? Probably not.
The whole thing is disconcerting. It was exciting when we hired Torts. Same with AV. Same with DQ. Same with GG. No matter who we hire, it is guaranteed not to be exciting. And that is upsetting.
Oscar Lindberg
Registered User
Dubas basically just said in his intro press conference that Sullivan is staying so that appears to be fully dead
Brutananadilewski
Registered User
Looks like it will be that guy who's always next to the Port Authority drinking Mr. Boston and keeps saying his name "Lemmy."
Or maybe Jimmy. Or maybe he's saying "kill me."
Or maybe Jimmy. Or maybe he's saying "kill me."
17futurecap
Registered User
- Sep 20, 2007
- 8,411
- 13,438
Would imagine he wants whoever he hires as GM to decide that anyway. Rangers arent going to wait around. At this point I would be shocked if its anyone besides Hynes/Lavi
- Status
