Toggle sidebar

Speculation: Roster Building Thread Part VIII: Autumn in New York

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
  • We are currently aware of "log in/security error" issues that are affecting some users. We apologize and ask for your patience as we try to get these issues fixed.
Status
Not open for further replies.
nyr2k2 said:
Hey! I was once voted Most Helpful Moderator AND Friendliest Poster in the same year! :laugh:

Everyone has their biases, I just think you're blinded by yours. Most of us can concede a point or acknowledge that a differing viewpoint has some validity. I don't think you can and it makes debates with you tedious and unrewarding.

But whatever, to each his own. Keep on keepin' on.
Click to expand...

It's actually something worse than a bias. It's an opinion that changes with the fortunes of a singular player.
 
Bozle said:
It's funny because right before that he was praising AV against all the criticism even sporting an AV avy, but as SOON as Buch was put on the fourth line he changed it to that :laugh:
Click to expand...

You are trying to mislead others.

I have always said AV is a good coach, the results show it, unlike a lot of people like you who complained over minor things and tried to argue that he wasn't a good coach, but the evidence shows that AV misuses younger players. I've had enough of that, its every season.
 
Pavel Buchnevich said:
You are trying to mislead others.

I have always said AV is a good coach, the results show it, unlike a lot of people like you who complained over minor things and tried to argue that he wasn't a good coach, but the evidence shows that AV misuses younger players. I've had enough of that, its every season.
Click to expand...

The evidence does not show that. It shows the opposite.

Look at the post that listed all the young players who have came along under AV. That's evidence.
 
nyr2k2 said:
Hey! I was once voted Most Helpful Moderator AND Friendliest Poster in the same year! :laugh:

Everyone has their biases, I just think you're blinded by yours. Most of us can concede a point or acknowledge that a differing viewpoint has some validity. I don't think you can and it makes debates with you tedious and unrewarding.

But whatever, to each his own. Keep on keepin' on.
Click to expand...

So why do you respond to my posts?

I had you on ignore because I had enough of your behavior, yet I saw you kept responding to me, so I thought I'd be nice, and take you off ignore. Looking like a mistake, as I can see you've continued your self superiority mindset, and are now coming after me for having a dissenting opinion that "makes me biased."
 
Hire Sather said:
The evidence does not show that. It shows the opposite.

Look at the post that listed all the young players who have came along under AV. That's evidence.
Click to expand...

You are looking at the results, ignoring the process.

Just because you get a good result doesn't mean the process was correct. This is every season with AV. Last year was Buchnevich, the year before Hayes, the year before Miller, I believe it was Kreider the year before that. Why does this happen every year? If he was so youth friendly, why would there be this problem every single season? He had it in Vancouver, as well.

You can say the results have turned out well, there's no disagreement there, but its an open question how much credit he deserves for that and I don't think it serves the team well to keep him on any longer, as he's shown that even with his approach he can't get the team over the hump, we are going backwards with results from his early years with the team.
 
Pavel Buchnevich said:
You are looking at the results, ignoring the process.

Just because you get a good result doesn't mean the process was correct. This is every season with AV. Last year was Buchnevich, the year before Hayes, the year before Miller, I believe it was Kreider the year before that. Why does this happen every year? If he was so youth friendly, why would there be this problem every single season? He had it in Vancouver, as well.

You can say the results have turned out well, there's no disagreement there, but its an open question how much credit he deserves for that and I don't think it serves the team well to keep him on any longer, as he's shown that even with his approach he can't get the team over the hump, we are going backwards with results from his early years with the team.
Click to expand...

Before digging yourself into a deeper hole, I suggest checking your personal understanding of "the process"

The Buchnevich example - aka, the hill you will die on - is particularly ridiculous considering the physical problems he had.
 
AV's bias with players exists but only within horrible veteran defensemen and Tanner Glass playing over (and pushing out) a bunch of superior options. We'll see if he's come around on the D (Staal shouldn't see more than 10 games this year as long as people are healthy and the Rangers haven't clinched anything) but it would be foolish to ignore just how many players (particularly young forwards) have seen their games take off since hes been hired.

Buchnevich got plenty of top 6/9 ice time before his back went all wonky on him and he got a decent amount after the fact. He took a seat in the playoffs over Glass since Glass actually picked a time not to be completely useless - This wasn't like a bunch of other times where Glass played over clearly superior options (Stempniak, Sheppard, etc.)
 
Bleed Ranger Blue said:
Before digging yourself into a deeper hole, I suggest checking your personal understanding of "the process"

The Buchnevich example - aka, the hill you will die on - is particularly ridiculous considering the physical problems he had.
Click to expand...

When are you going to end this narrative? I've twice presented you three other cases, yet you think you can successfully just throw my poster name back at me as a way to prove some ridiculous lie you are purporting? What if I changed that? You've refused to acknowledge that AV has had problems with young players in the three previous seasons, yet somehow you are going to frame this as something thats about me. This is every season, stop trying to make this about me, its just a deflection.
 
Pavel Buchnevich said:
When are you going to end this narrative? I've twice presented you three other cases, yet you think you can successfully just throw my poster name back at me as a way to prove some ridiculous lie you are purporting? What if I changed that? You've refused to acknowledge that AV has had problems with young players in the three previous seasons, yet somehow you are going to frame this as something thats about me. This is every season, stop trying to make this about me, its just a deflection.
Click to expand...

Im not refusing to acknowledge anything. Im actually acknowledging that "problems with younger players" is normal.

You, on the other hand, are trying to make a ridiculous argument that rookies should be left alone in top 6 spots and everything will be fine.
 
Bleed Ranger Blue said:
They had ups and downs, and came out better off after it.

THAT IS THE PROCESS. If you cannot comprehend that, you will continue to make an argument that makes you look silly.
Click to expand...

You are making a ridiculous argument. I guess you can just excuse every bad decision as part of the process, and if a player eventually finds there way through the "process", then AV gets a success story that people like you are going to say is proof that he does well with young players.

And what people like you ignore is that most of these players eventually find their way through it because they become older, the team NEEDS them to assume bigger roles as some players move onto other teams and AV is forced to give them bigger roles and trust them more. Can you give any examples of players finding their way through "the process" within the season that AV was very tough on them?
 
Bleed Ranger Blue said:
You, on the other hand, are trying to make a ridiculous argument that rookies should be left alone in top 6 spots and everything will be fine.
Click to expand...

I never said that.

Rookies should play in the top 9. If there isn't a role for them in the top 9, then they shouldn't be on the team, unless its a waivers type of situation. If a young player with top 9 potential is good enough to make your NHL roster, then you should be putting them in positions to succeed, not positions to fail.
 
Pavel Buchnevich said:
You are making a ridiculous argument. I guess you can just excuse every bad decision as part of the process, and if a player eventually finds there way through the "process", then AV gets a success story that people like you are going to say is proof that he does well with young players.

And what people like you ignore is that most of these players eventually find their way through it because they become older, the team NEEDS them to assume bigger roles as some players move onto other teams and AV is forced to give them bigger roles and trust them more. Can you give any examples of players finding their way through "the process" within the season that AV was very tough on them?
Click to expand...

Its just very tough to argue with somebody who believes that it's healthy to just leave things status quo when a young player invariably begins to struggle. Here, in reality, its actually much worse to continue feeding rookies to the wolves when they hit a rough patch.

You inexplicably view that as a coach ****ing up.
 
Bleed Ranger Blue said:
Its just very tough to argue with somebody who believes that it's healthy to just leave things status quo when a young player invariably begins to struggle. Here, in reality, its actually much worse to continue feeding rookies to the wolves when they hit a rough patch.

You inexplicably view that as a coach ****ing up.
Click to expand...

As I just said, if AV's so good with dealing with this and his methods are right, why does it seem like all these players figure it out one or two seasons after thie seasons and never right away? If AV is pushing the right buttons, wouldn't the player make the improvement that season and not a year or two after?
 
Pavel Buchnevich said:
As I just said, if AV's so good with dealing with this and his methods are right, why does it seem like all these players figure it out one or two seasons after thie seasons and never right away? If AV is pushing the right buttons, wouldn't the player make the improvement that season and not a year or two after?
Click to expand...

Because expecting a very young player to figure things out "right away" is stupid, to put it bluntly.
 
Just leaving players alone no matter how they play is not coaching. Coaches have a responsibility to do what they can to win games. Some players have a longer leash if they have prooduced more in the past but even vets get reductions to their roles.
 
Pavel Buchnevich said:
You are just trying to discredit me, which is no surprise coming from you with how rude you always act.

I have an opinion, maybe you have a different opinion. If you have a dissenting opinion, does that mean there can't be a conversation with you because you have a bias in the opposite direction?
Click to expand...

Did you just copy and paste this for every poster who's opinion doesn't line up with yours and have no problem calling you out? Just please stop this "everyone is out to get me" nonsnese.

Your opinion on how AV handles rookies is just that. A opinion. And its definitely the wrong one. The evidences shows that.

If you have a problem with AV take it to the AV thread.
 
Carl Hagelin had a 17 game stint in Hartford and then stepped into the NHL and has pretty much been the same player ever since.
 
PB- Sure AV don't deserve all credit, but it's a fact that kids fail most of the time. Of many players that make it, many never rid themselves of bad habits they initially had. For a long time, only McI has busted for us. With the rest not only making it but turning out really well.

People are also on AVs back for never trusting kids etc. but that is just not true, guys like Fast made it way earlier than expected, straight out of camp. Once Lindberg made it is was no looking back. Those guys never got the Miller and Hayes threatment. It's not like there was zero reason for forcing Hayes and Miller to pick up certain things. Kreider?? Come on that is just misinformed, Torts gave him a hard time while it was mostly a straight ride under AV.

Sorry for going on a rant! ;) I just think that talk -- that has been around for years, from day 1 -- just is way off. It started in Vancouver with Cody Hodgeson and that dude that is in EDM now via MTL. Can't even remember his name. These two where supposed to be Oates and Neely II but AV could just not see it because he hated kids. Well, those two sucked and the that notion is just ridiculous and beyond in hindsight. In NY, AV has very smoothly incorporated a tremendous amount of youth into the roster and besides McI not failed once. He is striking like 0.95 when the league average is at best 0.3. And I agree with you, it's not all AV.

But calling out AV for misthreating kids is like calling out Shestyorkin for playing horrible for SKA... ;)
 
It's late in Sweden, and I won't be able to explain this here, but the root to this misunderstanding is just that as a put side spectator it is quite frankly very hard for anyone to see all the ground work behind having a successful team, even from a strategical and personal coaching POV. In short, competition is very stiff and it is very easy to fail. Succeding is to a large extent about not failing. To win a game you have to play tremenoudsly well, to lose a game it takes just a few flaws. By a huge margin, most games are won by the team "not losing" it the best.

Certain people will always go mental because a Clendenning isn't played, and instead another obviously flawed player -- in their eyes -- that de facto don't have ACs upside is trusted by the coach.

Under Torts we where just destroyed every single time we faced a better team like Boston and Washington. It was a slaughter. Nobody did well under him besides a few grinders, but people liked him anyway. He was this crew's coach. We didn't suck because of Torts, we sucked because we had zero skill according to them. None. AV takes over and we over night starts playing a helluva lot better hockey, get much better results despite a much worse cap position etc. Still AV is universally hated, because many don't acknowledge the responsibility he takes in the big picture. They see Girardi=flawed+zero potential <<<<<<<< Clendenning=flawed+offense. AV must be brain dead for not seing that. But without getting into details, Clendenning is a player that could lose you games, while Girardi mostly managed to get by. Was a better bet at least. Helped more on the PK. Took responsibility when in tough situations. And so forth.

And it's the same with the kids. AV requires more from them in areas many just don't understand, they don't see that a Fast or Lindberg plays because they deliver in these areas while a Miller didn't play because he didn't deliver. Hence they resort to trashing AV, naturally. I would too if I couldn't understand what he is doing. My wish is just that people would try to understand and work a little harder to realize what these things is about.
 
Ola said:
It's late in Sweden, and I won't be able to explain this here, but the root to this misunderstanding is just that as a put side spectator it is quite frankly very hard for anyone to see all the ground work behind having a successful team, even from a strategical and personal coaching POV. In short, competition is very stiff and it is very easy to fail. Succeding is to a large extent about not failing. To win a game you have to play tremenoudsly well, to lose a game it takes just a few flaws. By a huge margin, most games are won by the team "not losing" it the best.

Certain people will always go mental because a Clendenning isn't played, and instead another obviously flawed player -- in their eyes -- that de facto don't have ACs upside is trusted by the coach.

Under Torts we where just destroyed every single time we faced a better team like Boston and Washington. It was a slaughter. Nobody did well under him besides a few grinders, but people liked him anyway. He was this crew's coach. We didn't suck because of Torts, we sucked because we had zero skill according to them. None. AV takes over and we over night starts playing a helluva lot better hockey, get much better results despite a much worse cap position etc. Still AV is universally hated, because many don't acknowledge the responsibility he takes in the big picture. They see Girardi=flawed+zero potential <<<<<<<< Clendenning=flawed+offense. AV must be brain dead for not seing that. But without getting into details, Clendenning is a player that could lose you games, while Girardi mostly managed to get by. Was a better bet at least. Helped more on the PK. Took responsibility when in tough situations. And so forth.

And it's the same with the kids. AV requires more from them in areas many just don't understand, they don't see that a Fast or Lindberg plays because they deliver in these areas while a Miller didn't play because he didn't deliver. Hence they resort to trashing AV, naturally. I would too if I couldn't understand what he is doing. My wish is just that people would try to understand and work a little harder to realize what these things is about.
Click to expand...

That's a great post. I've always stood by the statement that AV is a really smart hockey guy. My gripe with him has been in the playoffs, and getting guys to play with full effort.

In other words accountability, both of thyself and others.

AV is the diametric opposite of a Torts in terms of a few things, and that happens in hockey. Not every coach is a Babs or Q, where they strike a balance between a tactician and a hard ass.

This isn't too different from Nielsen vs Keenan from back in the day, only in reverse and with longer tenures.

IMO the things I'm hearing from AV so far this pre-season shows he (or JR) have taken the criticism into account and are publicly addressing them. It's a good power tool for Alain, and I hope he's enjoying it as it allots him a lot of leverage.

The players might not like it, but who cares as long as they win.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom