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

[RangerBoy]

Somehow I still don't think Laviolette is the guy. Seems like Friedman and Vince jumped the gun here. Usually when a reporter says things are moving towards a resolution or something to that affect, that means it's done already and they are just getting the news, and then something is announced shortly after. That didn't happen so makes me think nothing is close. Someone else is the guy.

Elliotte was on Marek's show a few minutes ago. The Rangers and Laviolette is not a done deal. Drury is taking his time. This is a big hire because Dolan is an impatient disaster.

 

[duhmetreE]

Lavi would really be Gallant 2.0. In that it was a safe choice, minimal risk.

Is his system going to be the difference?

Say we theoretically get to 50%+ xG and can maintain that in the Playoffs... Is that enough to win a cup? Maybe...

We tend to lash out and blame the players but teamwork/teamplay as a whole was ass. Arguably worst in the league. What's the teams potential if we can breakout the puck and attack as a unit? You would think it's Cup Worthy.

I just don't know if Lavi is that guy. Is it going to be more bang it off the glass and stretch passes? minimal puck support with forwards flying the zone? The offensive assistant hired will most likely make or break the hire IMO.

He also moved the Caps to a full-on Man System. Do we go to man-on-man here? KAM should flourish. Maybe our Centers would have a much easier time reading plays/defending. Our hybrid 'man-zone' left us with a lot of puck watching and being flat footed.

What happens with our young players? Once again, it's gonna fall on the Assistant Coach...

 

[Bacon Artemi Bravo]

Elliotte was on Marek's show a few minutes ago. The Rangers and Laviolette is not a done deal. Drury is taking his time. This is a bigger hire because Dolan is an impatient disaster.

So there is hope!

You'd think these guys would learn from a couple weeks ago that they may not want to stick their necks out until it's signed and done.

 

[SRHRangers]

Yeah, Sutter with his horrible treatment of young players and misusing finesse players such as Huberdeau (see, Panarin) sure seemed like a fit...

The same guy that is very good with 5v5 play, conditioning and would close up the country club

Yes. That guy

 

[Fitzy]

It's Laviolette. Any other hope/belief is cope.

We all hate this, so that means it'll probably work out.

And we drink a lot. So I'd say we've got a pretty good handle on it.

 

[duhmetreE]

My bias against Laviolette (what else to call it when you don't really know the difference between coaches) is about my feeling that the Rangers have all my life been chasing the template for how to win 5 years ago, never inventing their own identity. That's where the hate for the re-tread as re-tread comes in, as well as the hope for someone new to the scene.

With Shesterkin, I have little doubt that just about any coach we hire will get into the playoffs. He alone basically guarantees us 95-100 points. Sprinkle in a functional PP and you're flirting with a division or conference title. Laviolette, I'm sure, will 'have success' here, just as Gallant did. The question is whether he in any way adds something beyond the standings this season.

I was pro-Gallant at the time of hiring mainly because I loved the tenacity his Golden Knights, Panthers, and Canada WC teams played with. But the honeymoon was over for me as soon as Kreider-Zibanejad and Strome-Panarin were stapled together from the beginning of training camp, to say nothing of the D-pairs. It was obvious from that moment that what Gallant was bringing to the table was little more than getting out of his own way and maintaining the status quo more effectively than Quinn.

What's Laviolette going to bring that's any different? Maybe his rep as a 'tactician' (frankly something I'm only hearing about him now that, conveniently, the Rangers are looking for such a type) means that he'll do more instruction with the players, get them to play attentively to the system he's bringing (don't all coaches say everybody runs the same systems?). But what about this team's trajectory is changing, positively, by adding Laviolette to the mix? IDK, point is that from a very uneducated POV (my own), hiring Laviolette feels like a move meant to get more of (and a bit more out of) the same rather than changing anything this team's identity. JMHO

It depends on how you define success.

You mentioned Shesty and the PP. From what we know, Gallant and the coaching staff had little to nothing to do with that. Were we successful at 5v5? Most definitely not. We've been bad and an utter failure in the Playoffs two years in a row. We were atrocious last season and it was a miracle we got as far as we did. That's what got him fired. We looked like a pickup beer league team with no direction.

Can Lavi and co. fix the 5v5 woes? How much does he improve it? I wanted some fresh/invigorating style of hockey to be infused in. Essentially puck support and moving/working as 5. Not a 'run and gun' do what you want only type Still looking for structure in that everyone knows what their job/role is in any given scenario. It sounds simple but we were dreadful at it.

 

[TheGortonConspiracy]

At least it’s not that Voldemort looking f***

 

[duhmetreE]

 

[Leonardo87]

Here we go again…

Confirmed with Link: - Rangers Hire Peter Laviolette as Head Coach, Assistants Michael Peca & Dan Muse

forums.hfboards.com