Toggle sidebar

Confirmed with Link: Rangers hire Gallant as HC

  • 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
Unbelievably excited to see a bunch of "I'd like to see ______ under a different/NHL coach before deciding anything" come to fruition. Losing Gauthier will suck but maybe Drury rolls the dice on exposing Blackwell and hoping Seattle takes Howden.
 
Uninstaaled said:
He's regressed since coming into the league.

He showed more as a Rookie than he did last year. He sucks. Time to cut bait.
Click to expand...

I am not saying he does not suck, yet still if everyone else under the sun is getting another chance because of covid or Quinn or whatever, it seems like he should be a candidate too if he is still here.

I would not be protecting him from expansion, or signing him to more than his qualifier, or be unwilling to waive him should he not show well next camp, yet I don't think there is any harm in offering/signing him to his qualifier and saying that is that.

Edit: If he ends up waived and in the AHL it's not like they don't need centers there too
 
  • Like
Reactions: leetch99
Kodiak said:
I feel like changing lines/not changing lines is just easy fodder for criticizing a coach when things aren't working, and it will be the same for Gallant.

Coach changes up the lines and it doesn't work: "The guy doesn't know what he's doing. He's just throwing shit at the wall!"
Coach keeps the lines the same and it doesn't work: "The guy doesn't know what he's doing. He does the same thing over and over and hopes that it works this time."
Coach changes up the lines and it works: "Great move! The team needed a bit of a shakeup."
Coach keeps the lines the same and it works: "Great move! The team needed some time to build chemistry."

So during the rough patches for Gallant, I'm expecting to hear #2 a lot.
Click to expand...

I agree to this in general terms. You are right. But what Quinn did at times was infuriating.

He would put Kakko or Laf on a line in practice, start the game with the same lineup and literally within minutes of the first period it was changed.

And it happened often. It was a sign of panic, indecision - whatever. But he didn’t even let the lines settle into the game before making a switch. I seldom saw any good come out of that approach and honestly it was just f***ing annoying to me and I’m sure it was to the players as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: haveandare and CLW
HAHA spread this all over the internet and social media

199756068_152785073560448_8745296321396681971_n.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gluten Free Breadman, Speedtrials, One Winged Angel and 9 others
Laffy Taffy said:
Coaches love to tell the media about accountability. I feel like Gallant's interpretation of accountability is the most accurate of the general publics.

DQ accountability only applied to the 3rd line. The guy didnt have the balls to bench his top 6 when they were playing like shit, and he loves how much his 4th line "looked" while they were trying regardless of the results.

AV had way too many favorites and his refusal to play Yandle or some of the younger up and coming players at the time was also his issue with accountability.

Torts had the balls to do whatever the f*** he wanted...but was a little too trigger happy with that.

I really hope that Gallant will be the happy medium between all 3 of these. I hope he can put together the final individual stats of Quinn (we were pretty high up in the standings for goals for and a lot of stats), along with the playoff clinching success and results of AV, and the grit and accountability of torts. I dont think this is a longshot either, I really think this is the best recent coach we have had. I dont care what he says about gut feeling or fancy stats or what others say about his lack of adjustment. He has consistently put up GREAT analytic teams. I dont think thats a fluke and thats why I have a hard time buying into the "lack of xs and os" thing that some of our super knowledgeable posters (@Edge , sorry) keep saying. I could be wrong, but I'm excited for the first time in a long time.
Click to expand...

I mean it's not just me saying, it's seen as a thing by his peers. That's why it came up in Brooks' article and Jagr (though feeling it was exaggerated) didn't discount it either and pointed to the importance of strong assistant coach.

It's not really a matter of buying into something so much as it's acknowledging that any person, whether we like them or don't like them, or are excited about them or indifferent, usually don't fall into the realm of "all good" or "all bad", regardless of how nice and neat we want things to be.

It's something to keep in mind for fans who really like the use of metrics, or who get frustrated when a coach isn't playing 4D chess. That's not necessarily Gallant's strong suit, and it has been a factor in his departures from past teams. Whether it's an issue here remains to be seen, but that doesn't mean it's not part of the story to this point.
 
hackeyman said:
That would suggest his firings were his fault. The Florida firing happened because of an owner that got turned on by advance analytics and thought he was smarter than everyone else. Well we saw how that worked out . We really don't know for sure what happened the second time other than the team was struggling because Fleury was struggling with his father being ill and they didn't have a backup goalie. If he's guilty of anything it's getting great results really fast and raising expectations to an unreasonable level.
Click to expand...
I was just meming on the fact that he's 3/3 with his head coaching gigs lasting exactly 3 years.
 
Edge said:
I mean it's not just me saying, it's seen as a thing by his peers. That's why it came up in Brooks' article and Jagr (though feeling it was exaggerated) didn't discount it either and pointed to the importance of strong assistant coach.

It's not really a matter of buying into something so much as it's acknowledging that any person, whether we like them or don't like them, or are excited about them or indifferent, usually don't fall into the realm of "all good" or "all bad", regardless of how nice and neat we want things to be.

It's something to keep in mind for fans who really like the use of metrics, or who get frustrated when a coach isn't playing 4D chess. That's not necessarily Gallant's strong suit, and it has been a factor in his departures from past teams. Whether it's an issue here remains to be seen, but that doesn't mean it's not part of the story to this point.
Click to expand...

Isn't that what assistant coaches are for?

I am not a big proponent of the idea that coaching makes a huge difference compared to roster build, to me it's mostly about the players buying into whatever strategy the coaching comes up with. Like an identity that they can build upon.

As long as coaching and the players are on the same page isn't that sort of what the ideal is?

Quinn, I swear I have no idea what the strategy or identity was or was going to be. And I did not even really dislike the guy. It really seemed like it was throw the best players out there and hope they do stuff.

If Gallant can instill some sort of "plan" I have to think that is an improvement. (not saying it will become that yet much like with players at some point it becomes they are what they are, just with coaching)
 
  • Like
Reactions: DekeR
Edge said:
It's not really a matter of buying into something so much as it's acknowledging that any person, whether we like them or don't like them, or are excited about them or indifferent, usually don't fall into the realm of "all good" or "all bad", regardless of how nice and neat we want things to be.
Click to expand...
This has been going on since the gladiators in Ancient Rome and will never change. :laugh:
 
Edge said:
I think we certainly hope for the former, but wouldn't consider it a given under any/every coach.

I also think we don't necessarily hope for the latter, but wouldn't consider it a given under any/every coach.
Click to expand...

Nothing is a given with any coach. It's all best guess stuff.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Edge
rangers1314 said:
Nothing on their socials yet either. It’s been 24 hours since the news broke. Very odd
Click to expand...

Rangers new PR strategy is to only announce moves via reporters or by change the personnel pages on the site. No official press statements or conferences. Watch when he makes his first trade. One day, Eichel's name will just appear on the Rangers roster page.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gluten Free Breadman, HatTrick Swayze, Unusual Suspect and 4 others
Off Sides said:
Isn't that what assistant coaches are for?

I am not a big proponent of the idea that coaching makes a huge difference compared to roster build, to me it's mostly about the players buying into whatever strategy the coaching comes up with. Like an identity that they can build upon.

As long as coaching and the players are on the same page isn't that sort of what the ideal is?

Quinn, I swear I have no idea what the strategy or identity was or was going to be. And I did not even really dislike the guy. It really seemed like it was throw the best players out there and hope they do stuff.

If Gallant can instill some sort of "plan" I have to think that is an improvement. (not saying it will become that yet much like with players at some point it becomes they are what they are, just with coaching)
Click to expand...

They're definitely part of the equation. However, at the end of the day, the playbook still starts and ends with the coach. After all when a coach is disliked and the team is performing badly it certainly is.

I return to the belief that he is at a crossroads in his career. As other people have mentioned, he comes in with at least somewhat of a reputation that sees him trying to stare down Buck Showalter comparisons.

That's why I think it is a good opportunity for him. If changes some of the narrative here, he's writing his own ticket.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NYR88
I’m as excited as I can be about this without being over-the-top like I was when we signed Panarin or won the draft lotteries.

If you aren’t getting a guy like Quennville or one of the true elite coaches then I think Gallant is in that very next tier. On top of that it’s even more rare to see a coach win a Cup with two different teams - Gallant is kind of the perfect mixture of prior success without having used up all his Cup luck, tough but fair, experienced but not over the hill, hungry to still prove something (that he can be a Cup winning coach).

It’s a hard league to win in but I think Gallant was about as good a hire as was possible. I certainly would have taken the gamble on Brind’amour but I’m not sure there are many names that would have been better for us, period, available or not. Maybe 4-5 names in the entire league?

I think Gallant is definitely the caliber coach who can win a Cup. He’s got a ton of talent to work with and a track record of development on his side. What’s not to like?
 
  • Like
Reactions: NYRangers16
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom