Toggle sidebar

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Stugots said:
It’s funny because that doesn’t exactly send a great message to the guy they eventually do hire.

“Hey Peter I know we interviewed you a month ago but can you just wait another week for our answer? We want to see if a better option becomes available.”
Click to expand...
I remember when Mike Shuler was hired he said he wasn't his wife's first choice either. Think he won coach of the year.
 
Stugots said:
It’s funny because that doesn’t exactly send a great message to the guy they eventually do hire.

“Hey Peter I know we interviewed you a month ago but can you just wait another week for our answer? We want to see if a better option becomes available.”
Click to expand...

Laviolette probably had options in the broadcasting world. Worked for Tocchet
 
Stugots said:
It’s funny because that doesn’t exactly send a great message to the guy they eventually do hire.

“Hey Peter I know we interviewed you a month ago but can you just wait another week for our answer? We want to see if a better option becomes available.”
Click to expand...
Considering at minimum we know Drury preferred Sullivan, Keefe and Quenneville to Laviolette, it’s a terrible message
 
  • Like
Reactions: HockeyBasedNYC, TheDirtyH and HatTrick Swayze
I Eat Crow said:
Has it been reported anywhere that the Rangers would have to add an asset to Goodrow to trade him? Am I that out to lunch to think that he'd actually net the Rangers an asset back if he's dealt?
Click to expand...
That’s nonsense. The poster is just on a wild rant. They won’t need to add and in fact can easily buy him out if they want. But in all likelihood we get something useful for him without adding.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NYRFANMANI and Chalfdiggity3
bhamill said:
That’s nonsense. The poster is just on a wild rant. They won’t need to add and in fact can easily buy him out if they want. But in all likelihood we get something useful for him without adding.
Click to expand...
What are you basing that on?

In a normal world, where more teams have cap space, sure, we could get something for Goodrow. But with the flat cap, teams know that we're up against it. It's already been suggested that Garland will require a sweetener to move. Garland has a 4.95 mil cap hit, but only 3 more years, and is a better offensive player.

You may be unpleasantly surprised at the return for Goodrow.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mandiblesofdoom
I am enjoying the overreaction in this thread. Truly am. I am sure I would be reading this reaction for pretty much anyone we hired.

Literally we could be hiring Jesus Christ himself and there would be people yelling RETREAD RETREAD haha.

I much prefer Lavy over Hynes and I certainly am not going to get upset over hiring an established NHL coach until that coach and team are underperforming. Its June.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ncdoc, MrAlmost, Daves a mess and 6 others
I still find it weird this is the second time it’s been “official” but after that coming out at lunch time, it’s now 7 PM ET and no official word from any team outlet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NickyFotiu
GAGLine said:
What are you basing that on?

In a normal world, where more teams have cap space, sure, we could get something for Goodrow. But with the flat cap, teams know that we're up against it. It's already been suggested that Garland will require a sweetener to move. Garland has a 4.95 mil cap hit, but only 3 more years, and is a better offensive player.

You may be unpleasantly surprised at the return for Goodrow.
Click to expand...
I’m basing it off the fact that players like Goodrow are always in demand to some extent. “It’s been suggested” is not a lock on a sweetener being needed on Garland being moved. Plus Goodrow is 1.5 mil below Garland and an easy buyout, not a very good comparison IMO. But the main point is we absolutely WONT HAVE TO add assets to him to move him, we can simply buy him out. That narrative is trash.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NickyFotiu and Chalfdiggity3
RGY said:
I am enjoying the overreaction in this thread. Truly am. I am sure I would be reading this reaction for pretty much anyone we hired.

Literally we could be hiring Jesus Christ himself and there would be people yelling RETREAD RETREAD haha.

I much prefer Lavy over Hynes and I certainly am not going to get upset over hiring an established NHL coach until that coach and team are underperforming. Its June.
Click to expand...
This ^
Couldn’t agree more
 
  • Like
Reactions: ncdoc and NickyFotiu
cheech70 said:


whats wrong with this?
Click to expand...

1686611648299.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: Synergy27
bhamill said:
I’m basing it off the fact that players like Goodrow are always in demand to some extent. “It’s been suggested” is not a lock on a sweetener being needed on Garland being moved. Plus Goodrow is 1.5 mil below Garland and an easy buyout, not a very good comparison IMO. But the main point is we absolutely WONT HAVE TO add assets to him to move him, we can simply buy him out. That narrative is trash.
Click to expand...
Buying him out isn't ideal either. We save a lot the next 2 years, but then the bill comes due.

We'll see what happens, but our only opportunity to buy him out will likely be during the regular period, as we are unlikely to have arbitration cases.
 
RGY said:
I am enjoying the overreaction in this thread. Truly am. I am sure I would be reading this reaction for pretty much anyone we hired.

Literally we could be hiring Jesus Christ himself and there would be people yelling RETREAD RETREAD haha.

I much prefer Lavy over Hynes and I certainly am not going to get upset over hiring an established NHL coach until that coach and team are underperforming. Its June.
Click to expand...

lol it’s not Jesus though And Jesus would turn that ice into wine by the end of the game lol.

but seriousl, it’s more about getting a coach who thinks the game in a modern way and can help our young players grow and become more And play as a team.
lavy is not good with kids, he leans on the vets, and he has gotten progressively worse as a coach the past 3 years. So while you can say we aren’t happy with the hire bc it’s not Jesus, it’s more about not going with someone who is legitimately the same thing as gallant. End of story

GAGLine said:
Buying him out isn't ideal either. We save a lot the next 2 years, but then the bill comes due.

We'll see what happens, but our only opportunity to buy him out will likely be during the regular period, as we are unlikely to have arbitration cases.
Click to expand...

sorry but having about $2 million on the books for that last year is meaningless if the cap is supposed to go up like 12 million. It’s not ideal but it’s better than attaching a high draft pick
 
GAGLine said:
Buying him out isn't ideal either. We save a lot the next 2 years, but then the bill comes due.

We'll see what happens, but our only opportunity to buy him out will likely be during the regular period, as we are unlikely to have arbitration cases.
Click to expand...
We would save his entire cap plus 300K extra over the next two years. After that the cap will be much higher and the bill isn’t half bad.
None of this changes the fact the we absolutely should not have to pay anyone to take Goodrow.
But of course we are ALL speculating, it’s just that people are so eager to tar and feather Drury they throw crazy shit out there. Recently saw someone suggest getting someone to take Goodrow would cost us a 1st. It’s f***ing insanity on here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chalfdiggity3
RGY said:
I am enjoying the overreaction in this thread. Truly am. I am sure I would be reading this reaction for pretty much anyone we hired.

Literally we could be hiring Jesus Christ himself and there would be people yelling RETREAD RETREAD haha.

I much prefer Lavy over Hynes and I certainly am not going to get upset over hiring an established NHL coach until that coach and team are underperforming. Its June.
Click to expand...
This is the board made up by some experts that had a tank the season thread 1 month in to the 2014 season. The 2014 season that we went to the Stanley Cup Finals.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ncdoc, bhamill, MrAlmost and 2 others
RangerBoy said:
Even if the Rangers had a good coach, Drury is incapable of making the right moves

Nemeth's contract(3/$7.5M) was traded with two 2nd round picks attached

Buchnevich was given away for nothing. People say Gorton was also trading Buchnevich but Gorton was getting back more than Blais and a 2nd.

Goodrow was given 6 years and $3.6M AAV. How many assets is Chris attaching to move that contract?

Reaves for a 3rd and then trades Reaves for a 5th

Gallant is gone after two seasons.

All of the Chris's moves when he became Rangers GM backfired.
Click to expand...

Karmic payback for abandoning the rebuild. The rebuild was the right path. Trying to win with Trouba/Kreider/Zibanejad was not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mandiblesofdoom and Kocur26
  • Like
Reactions: cheech70, RangersFan1994, Daves a mess and 1 other person
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom