Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XX (WTF are we going to do this Off-Season edition)

[NYR Viper]

Didn't de Haan also say that Drury brought him in with the expectation that he would play? Frequent communication isn't as important as effective and clear communication. Quality over quantity.

I mean the player himself said that Drury is a good communicator with the players. That's firsthand knowledge. I don't think it's fair for us to question it beyond that unless someone here is also around the team as much as De Haan would have been

 

[NYR Viper]

I like this guy. I like him on the ice and I like him off the ice. I respect that he wanted to play. The bridge is probably burnt but I kinda wish we gave him more of a chance.

He says his relationship with Drury was ok.

I'm speculating here but maybe it was Laviolette that didn't want to rotate CDH in and Drury told him something to the effect of "hey, I'm not the coach, sorry" which he has every right to do.

Unfortunately, he won't be back. But I would have liked him as a depth d-man on this team. #7-8?

 

[GAGLine]

I mean the player himself said that Drury is a good communicator with the players. That's firsthand knowledge. I don't think it's fair for us to question it beyond that unless someone here is also around the team as much as De Haan would have been

He has said some things which can be viewed as contradictory, which is my point. And there have been other instances where Drury's management style has come into question.

I don't think it's reasonable to completely dismiss those concerns simply because a guy who previously called out Drury is now calling him a good communicator. de Haan wants a job next year. It probably wouldn't be in his best interest to call out Drury at this point.

 

[McRanger92]

I like this guy. I like him on the ice and I like him off the ice. I respect that he wanted to play. The bridge is probably burnt but I kinda wish we gave him more of a chance.

He says his relationship with Drury was ok.

I'm speculating here but maybe it was Laviolette that didn't want to rotate CDH in and Drury told him something to the effect of "hey, I'm not the coach, sorry" which he has every right to do.

Drury has not been on the same page of either of the coaches he's hired so far, that's pretty obvious. We all know Laviolette was not making optimal lineup decisions this season. I tend to agree with you speculation. All we've heard about Sullivan and drury is that they have a great relationship, so hopefully that leads to more cohesion with the organization.

Im speculating now too but after hearing de Haan it further points to guys like Zibanejad not being mad about a lack of "communication" but more a lack of their input being given to roster moves. Which is crazy when you havent won anything. The locker room this year was a bunch of crybabies and you cant convince me otherwise. Every forward thinking fan wanted Goodrow and Trouba gone. Drury does it without any long-term repercussions, and he's the bad guy because the other players are sad that they werent consulted? There's plenty to critique the guy on with actual moves but the fanbase should be revolting against these entitled vets, not the GM trying to move them.

 

[GAGLine]

Thats true, but how much and when he plays is really up to the HC, not the GM.

That's true, but Drury traded for Soucy. He is, therefore, responsible for adding the player the coach played ahead of de Haan.

I'm not even saying that what Drury did was necessarily wrong. I'm just pushing back against the notion that he's a good communicator.

 

[NickyFotiu]

De haan saying Drury is a communicator and personable while implying that our beat reporters are a bunch of washer-women doesn't really fit the narrative, eh?

Wow that was a great find. De Haan really impressed me there.

 

[Machinehead]

Also, the vibe I got from that is that the media overblew what his intentions were.

"Wait until after the season" was a brush-off, not "oh I'll be back, and then everyone's gonna get it!" His original comment about treatment may have been about Laviolette or perhaps it was directed at a teammate the media just overheard. Doesn't seem like there's as much there as we thought.

I acknowledge the possibility that this could all be spin. Maybe PR did come down on him and he doesn't want to be looked at as a malcontent. But idk, I kinda believe him. Just the vibe I get.

 

[Levitate]

I like this guy. I like him on the ice and I like him off the ice. I respect that he wanted to play. The bridge is probably burnt but I kinda wish we gave him more of a chance.

He says his relationship with Drury was ok.

I'm speculating here but maybe it was Laviolette that didn't want to rotate CDH in and Drury told him something to the effect of "hey, I'm not the coach, sorry" which he has every right to do.

Yeah, I think this thing is on Laviolette and by that time in the season he was pretty much in full panic mode. I feel like the Laviolette we saw in season one was a far different coach than we say by the end of season two. Placating DeHaan wasn't high on his list of things to do.

Drury has not been on the same page of either of the coaches he's hired so far, that's pretty obvious. We all know Laviolette was not making optimal lineup decisions this season. I tend to agree with you speculation. All we've heard about Sullivan and drury is that they have a great relationship, so hopefully that leads to more cohesion with the organization.

Im speculating now too but after hearing de Haan it further points to guys like Zibanejad not being mad about a lack of "communication" but more a lack of their input being given to roster moves. Which is crazy when you havent won anything. The locker room this year was a bunch of crybabies and you cant convince me otherwise. Every forward thinking fan wanted Goodrow and Trouba gone. Drury does it without any long-term repercussions, and he's the bad guy because the other fans are sad that they werent consulted? There's plenty to critique the guy on with actual moves but the fanbase should be revolting against these entitled vets, not the GM trying to move them.

Honestly feels like it comes down to the team was "incredibly close and tight" and that led to some bad feelings when some guys got traded and certain players were upset with how things were going. Which is...weird with how it played out.

 

[Oscar Lindberg]

My interest in hearing what DeHaan has to say pretty much vanished once he disappeared to talk Rangers PR and walked everything back thereafter

Guy wants a job next year, he’s not going to shit on them after they told him to shut up.

 

[noncents]

De haan saying Drury is a communicator and personable while implying that our beat reporters are a bunch of washer-women doesn't really fit the narrative, eh?

interesting here re: CDHs view of how it went down. he blames the reporters. i wonder if that's him covering his bases or what.

 

[Tawnos]

Drury has not been on the same page of either of the coaches he's hired so far, that's pretty obvious. We all know Laviolette was not making optimal lineup decisions this season. I tend to agree with you speculation. All we've heard about Sullivan and drury is that they have a great relationship, so hopefully that leads to more cohesion with the organization.

Im speculating now too but after hearing de Haan it further points to guys like Zibanejad not being mad about a lack of "communication" but more a lack of their input being given to roster moves. Which is crazy when you havent won anything. The locker room this year was a bunch of crybabies and you cant convince me otherwise. Every forward thinking fan wanted Goodrow and Trouba gone. Drury does it without any long-term repercussions, and he's the bad guy because the other players are sad that they werent consulted? There's plenty to critique the guy on with actual moves but the fanbase should be revolting against these entitled vets, not the GM trying to move them.

Personally, I think you and a lot of others, including Brian Boyle, have misunderstood what Zibanejad was saying. He wasn't asking for consultation on roster moves. He's saying they should be communicated to about situations that specifically are about them, individually, directly from Drury instead of finding out about it either the moment it happens or through the media. Something that apparently didn't happen with Goodrow, or Trouba. Kreider too, for that matter. He didn't explain himself well, but that's far more likely than anything about roster moves. I don't think he thinks it should be that way for every player, but for the guys who have earned it through long service and/or wearing a letter? That's different.

It's not about consultation on roster moves and checking in with guys during the season are not remotely the same thing as that. The De Haan interview there changes nothing about what the players griped about.

We will agree though that the players handled it all incredibly poorly.

 

[kovazub94]

That's true, but Drury traded for Soucy. He is, therefore, responsible for adding the player the coach played ahead of de Haan.

I'm not even saying that what Drury did was necessarily wrong. I'm just pushing back against the notion that he's a good communicator.

I don't know if it's a communication issue - before getting Souce Drury probably genuinely believed what he said.

Getting Soucy is a question from the roster management perspective. Does Drury think he's done looking for high end LD? if so it's a mistake IMO. If not then where Souce fits between being too expensive for 3LD and cap being an issue for the Rangers next year even after subtracting Kreider's $6.5m

 

[bernmeister]

Kings’ president Robitallee stated yesterday that LA needs more physicality.

Surely Panarin will help in this area.

I do not think Kings will be interested in Panarin for free.

concur bread to LA IS NOT A FIT

Schneid + zib at half +
for
Byfield +


Panarin at half to DAL for Bischel

 

[McRanger92]

interesting here re: CDHs view of how it went down. he blames the reporters. i wonder if that's him covering his bases or what.

Fwiw de Haan blamed the reporters the day of the original incident

 

[Levitate]

Personally, I think you and a lot of others, including Brian Boyle, have misunderstood what Zibanejad was saying. He wasn't asking for consultation on roster moves. He's saying they should be communicated to about situations that specifically are about them, individually, directly from Drury instead of finding out about it either the moment it happens or through the media. Something that apparently didn't happen with Goodrow, or Trouba. Kreider too, for that matter. He didn't explain himself well, but that's far more likely than anything about roster moves. I don't think he thinks it should be that way for every player, but for the guys who have earned it through long service and/or wearing a letter? That's different.

It's not about consultation on roster moves and checking in with guys during the season are not remotely the same thing as that. The De Haan interview there changes nothing about what the players griped about.

We will agree though that the players handled it all incredibly poorly.

well to put it frankly that's bullshit. I'd bet that most GMs in this league don't go around consulting with their players first before working on trades. Coming to a player and saying "I've got a trade worked out will you waive?" isn't a wild thing.

 

[McRanger92]

Personally, I think you and a lot of others, including Brian Boyle, have misunderstood what Zibanejad was saying. He wasn't asking for consultation on roster moves. He's saying they should be communicated to about situations that specifically are about them, individually, directly from Drury instead of finding out about it either the moment it happens or through the media. Something that apparently didn't happen with Goodrow, or Trouba. Kreider too, for that matter. He didn't explain himself well, but that's far more likely than anything about roster moves. I don't think he thinks it should be that way for every player, but for the guys who have earned it through long service and/or wearing a letter? That's different.

It's not about consultation on roster moves and checking in with guys during the season are not remotely the same thing as that. The De Haan interview there changes nothing about what the players griped about.

We will agree though that the players handled it all incredibly poorly.

Why is Zibanejad, who has a No Move Clause, still griping about the timing of Barclay Goodrow being placed on waivers over a year later? Would he feel better if Drury called Goodrow 15 minutes earlier than he did? As for Trouba, clearly he wasnt blindsided because he had enough time to contact his agent and submit his no trade list that blocked the move to the team the Rangers wanted to send him. Which was his hometown Red Wings fwiw. None of this effected Zibanejad or Kreider in any way. The veterans play has earned them nothing. They'd blown 3 straight playoff series that they were favored and had a series lead in. Management was well within their rights to make changes and they didnt have to clear it with the players. It wouldnt have changed anything.

 

[kovazub94]

well to put it frankly that's bullshit. I'd bet that most GMs in this league don't go around consulting with their players first before working on trades. Coming to a player and saying "I've got a trade worked out will you waive?" isn't a wild thing.

Yup, even when it (communication) is done is more of an exception than a rule.

 

[SA16]

Fwiw de Haan blamed the reporters the day of the original incident

Has he considered blaming himself? Kind of odd to blame a reporter for writing a story based on the comments that he himself made. That's what reporters do.

 

[UnSandvich]

Also could be possible that after he saw how the first few months of the season went, and dealt with the locker room's mutiny, Drury decided to get more involved and start communicating more with the players.

 

[MrAlmost]

It's is quite possible that Drury wasn't communicating enough and has since changed that approach and so De Haan saw the increased communication Drury vs perhaps the previous version of his hands off.

This also reeks of there is a guy that didn't communicate anything to me and it's not the trainers, GM, etc. It's the coach.

I'd trade Soucy right now and resign De Haan. The difference in cost would be 2.5 ish million and the difference in play would be negligible.

Edit: By negligible I mean that De Haan is better. But I've wanted the Rangers to get him the last few years as a 6/7 guy and we finally did and blew it.

 

[Tawnos]

Why is Zibanejad, who has a No Move Clause, still griping about the timing of Barclay Goodrow being placed on waivers over a year later? Would he feel better if Drury called Goodrow 15 minutes earlier than he did? As for Trouba, clearly he wasnt blindsided because he had enough time to contact his agent and submit his no trade list that blocked the move to the team the Rangers wanted to send him. Which was his hometown Red Wings fwiw. None of this effected Zibanejad or Kreider in any way. The veterans play has earned them nothing. They'd blown 3 straight playoff series that they were favored and had a series lead in. Management was well within their rights to make changes and they didnt have to clear it with the players. It wouldnt have changed anything.

It's a team, and it was a close-knit one at that. Group dynamics are an incredibly important aspect of the success of any hockey team and this kind of stuff DOES affect players who aren't directly involved in it.

If you believe that better handling of those situations wouldn't have changed anything, I don't know what to tell you. Could the players decided to get on with it? Sure, and it's 100% on them that they didn't. IMO they didn't have to have something to get past in the first place and I'm not inclined to give Drury the benefit of the doubt based on everything else we've seen reported over the years.

 

[Tawnos]

well to put it frankly that's bullshit. I'd bet that most GMs in this league don't go around consulting with their players first before working on trades. Coming to a player and saying "I've got a trade worked out will you waive?" isn't a wild thing.

Well, I think that goes back to what I said the other day. It wasn't one thing, it was the snowballing of everything.

 

[Alluckks]

So, Kreider's name was on the wall in red paint obviously. Zib has had some stuff in there but always with the caveat about his NMC - coupled with his pretty stern remarks late in the season. Lafreniere's name was floated by Brooks originally in season when he did the Tkachuck mongering, but now Laf is out there again with Mollie, who works with Brooks. Brooks typically the mouthpiece for Rangers management/ownership. Panarin's name out there by national reporters.

I can see a world where all of Kreider, Panarin, and Laf move.

 

[Levitate]

It's a team, and it was a close-knit one at that. Group dynamics are an incredibly important aspect of the success of any hockey team and this kind of stuff DOES affect players who aren't directly involved in it.

If you believe that better handling of those situations wouldn't have changed anything, I don't know what to tell you. Could the players decided to get on with it? Sure, and it's 100% on them that they didn't. IMO they didn't have to have something to get past in the first place and I'm not inclined to give Drury the benefit of the doubt based on everything else we've seen reported over the years.

We've also seen people around the team comment on how fragile and emotional and tough to coach this team was. Coddling that ultimately probably wasn't the right move especially since again this group has won anything

 

[Tawnos]

We've also seen people around the team comment on how fragile and emotional and tough to coach this team was. Coddling that ultimately probably wasn't the right move especially since again this group has won anything

OK, but if you're the GM it's your job to know that's the group you have. Make changes to remove some of that fragility, yes... but do your best not to set the damn thing on fire.