Speculation: The Off-Season Thread Part VI - Are we there yet? (Grabovski to Caps, 1 yr)

  • 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
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sounds beautiful.

They could've joined a league at Chelsea Piers for that.

You know there have been successful coaches in this league that didn't try and scare players to play their system. Torts has his way and he lost the room; that doesn't mean the players are soft. After a while every Tyrant ends up not being heard. But you'll defend Torts the clown under all circumstances. No surprise here.
 
Seriously? You've got 4 35+ contracts. The majority of your top players are 30+.

Jagr 41
Elias 37
Zubrus 35
Ryder 33
Clowe 30
Zajac 28

Salvatore 37
Zidlicky 36
Volchenkov 31
Greene 30
Harold 30
Larsson 20

Brodeur 41
Schneider 27

Larsson hasn't lived up to his hype yet, but he's only 20. Henrique is only 23, but coming off a down year. Outside of those 2, what young proven guys do you have? None. Loktionov hasn't done much yet.

Compare that to the Rangers:

Richards 33
Nash 29
Callahan 28
Brassard 25
Hagelin 25
Zuccarello 25
Stepan 23

Girardi 29
Stralman 27
Staal 26
McDonagh 24
Del Zotto 23
Moore 22

Biron 36
Lundqvist 31

Our entire defense is younger than your entire defense outside of Larsson.

Kreider hasn't done much yet, but is only 22. We have a number of kids that are on the cusp of being ready for the NHL. Our farm system is consistently ranked higher than the devil's system. That doesn't look to change with you guys trading the 9th overall for a 27 year old goalie and not having a 1st next year.

Throwing in a bunch of unproven kids to bring the average age down doesn't make you a young team.

This lays it out perfectly. Be shocked if the Devil fan "who had" to interject will be back on this point. His post has been completely discredited.
 
You know there have been successful coaches in this league that didn't try and scare players to play their system. Torts has his way and he lost the room; that doesn't mean the players are soft. After a while every Tyrant ends up not being heard. But you'll defend Torts the clown under all circumstances. No surprise here.

I defended Renney too. In fact, Ill defend any coach that is overrun by a bunch of a players that think they're better than they actually are.
 
This lays it out perfectly. Be shocked if the Devil fan "who had" to interject will be back on this point. His post has been completely discredited.

The entire argument is silly. It shouldnt be about who has the younger team, it should be about who has the better team -- and thats the Rangers right now, but only because of the recent defections of Kovalchuk and Parise. It has little to do with age. Our 30 year old goaltender got outplayed by their 40 year old goaltender in the ECF 2 seasons ago. It happens.
 
I defended Renney too. In fact, Ill defend any coach that is overrun by a bunch of a players that think they're better than they actually are.

That's what concerns me about Richards and some other players comments - just because there is a new coach doesn't mean that he can wave a magic wand and make the players better. Players such as Richards and Del Zotto really have to focus on what they can do as individuals to improve their game and not use the coaching change as a crutch.

Gomez pushed for Renney's firing and felt he could thrive offensively under Torts but got his ass shipped out of town instead. Richards and others may find themselves in a similar situation if they talk the talk but don't walk the walk.
 
JohBc0A.jpg
 
That's what concerns me about Richards and some other players comments - just because there is a new coach doesn't mean that he can wave a magic wand and make the players better. Players such as Richards and Del Zotto really have to focus on what they can do as individuals to improve their game and not use the coaching change as a crutch.

Gomez pushed for Renney's firing and felt he could thrive offensively under Torts but got his ass shipped out of town instead. Richards and others may find themselves in a similar situation if they talk the talk but don't walk the walk.

Agreed.

And not only that, but the '11-12 team had the most successful Ranger season since 1994 playing the brand of hockey they revolted against last season. Not wanting to block shots anymore, or complaining that the philosophy is too taxing, or feeling :( because they got yelled at too much just aren't viable excuses for me. They are excuses for the mentally weak.

You want to make the argument that Torts' message started falling on deaf ears. Fine. But the players are the ones that made that decision -- and they are the ones that will need to back it up this upcoming season.
 
Girardi is the only player I have heard express any love for Tortorella. Richards made some comments to Brooks. Even Stepan discussed looking forward to the new coach in the interview with Steve Mears at NHL.com. Callahan said he had not spoken to Torts. Lundqvist spoke to Torts. Henrik was concerned about the public perception that he spoke to Sather about dumping Tortorella. Richards and Tortorella were all chumy. Now its cold as ice on winters day in February. Weird situation. Things got that between them in a few short months? Tortorella was too stubborn to change. It was time for a change.
 
Agreed.

And not only that, but the '11-12 team had the most successful Ranger season since 1994 playing the brand of hockey they revolted against last season. Not wanting to block shots anymore, or complaining that the philosophy is too taxing, or feeling :( because they got yelled at too much just aren't viable excuses for me. They are excuses for the mentally weak.

You want to make the argument that Torts' message started falling on deaf ears. Fine. But the players are the ones that made that decision -- and they are the ones that will need to back it up this upcoming season.

You spend a lot of time judging the players based on little evidence. There have been quotes that have indicated that the players rebelled and there have been quotes saying the opposite. You can believe whatever you want, but I don't think it's fair to characterize them that way when you don't really know what happened.

Yeah, the 2011-12 season was their best since 1997. That doesn't mean that Tort's system was the best fit for this team, or that Torts was the best coach for this team. We were the #1 team in the east. We went to 7 games against the 8th and 7th seeds and lost to the 6th seed in 6 games. I could just as easily characterize that season as a disappointment. I could conclude that Tort's system wore the players down and isn't sustainable over 82 games plus 4 rounds of playoffs. Either way it's conjecture.
 
That's what concerns me about Richards and some other players comments - just because there is a new coach doesn't mean that he can wave a magic wand and make the players better. Players such as Richards and Del Zotto really have to focus on what they can do as individuals to improve their game and not use the coaching change as a crutch.

Gomez pushed for Renney's firing and felt he could thrive offensively under Torts but got his ass shipped out of town instead. Richards and others may find themselves in a similar situation if they talk the talk but don't walk the walk.

The number one job of a coach is to put their players in a position to succeed. I dont think the players expect to be magically better due to a new coach, but rather expect to be given a greater chance to succeed in a new system.
 
The number one job of a coach is to put their players in a position to succeed. I dont think the players expect to be magically better due to a new coach, but rather expect to be given a greater chance to succeed in a new system.

Maybe. I mean that's the goal. The fact is they experienced, in actuality not potential, their most success as a team in 15 years with Torts and his system.

Honestly players obviously in many many ways know more than observers. They are in the room. They know the emotions. They know what goes on behind closed doors. They spend their lives deep into the details of hockey. But in some ways an outside observer can see trends in the big picture over time. Like what Torts hockey did for this franchise. Like what "opening it up" often resulted in, or needed (a superstar aka Jagr) to be effective. How many of these guys actually even played for Renney?
 
The number one job of a coach is to put their players in a position to succeed. I dont think the players expect to be magically better due to a new coach, but rather expect to be given a greater chance to succeed in a new system.

But as I mentioned previously, in Richards' case, the new system does not matter one iota. He was not physically prepared and showed up to camp out of shape last year.

The greatest chance for him to succeed is to work hard in the summer and come into camp in the best shape of his life. There's also the possibility that he is done as a player and no new system will help him there.
 
Maybe. I mean that's the goal. The fact is they experienced, in actuality not potential, their most success as a team in 15 years with Torts and his system.

That is a fact that can't be argued. What can be argued is how much Tort's system contributed to that success. Maybe with a different system, we beat both the Sens and Caps in 5 games each. Maybe we beat the devils too. Or maybe we don't get out of the first round.

The point is, we don't really know. It isn't something we can measure. The fact that it was their best season since since 97 doesn't prove that either the system or the coach were the best fit for that team.
 
You spend a lot of time judging the players based on little evidence. There have been quotes that have indicated that the players rebelled and there have been quotes saying the opposite. You can believe whatever you want, but I don't think it's fair to characterize them that way when you don't really know what happened.

Yeah, the 2011-12 season was their best since 1997. That doesn't mean that Tort's system was the best fit for this team, or that Torts was the best coach for this team. We were the #1 team in the east. We went to 7 games against the 8th and 7th seeds and lost to the 6th seed in 6 games. I could just as easily characterize that season as a disappointment. I could conclude that Tort's system wore the players down and isn't sustainable over 82 games plus 4 rounds of playoffs. Either way it's conjecture.

I spend enough time bashing Sather. None of us are involved directly in the situation, so this is a place to share what you think happened.

I happen to think that the most likely scenario, by far, is that a handful of players' opinions led Sather to make a knee-jerk reaction into firing the coach. Call it conjecture if you like, but something strange happened, and if you're not going to provide what you think happened, then your lack of an argument means nothing to me.
 
I once had the same teacher for 3 straight years. She was a nice woman but we were sick of her by the 2nd year. When we walked into classroom and it was her again...She was a very good teacher but it was too much. Same thing with Tortorella.
 
That is a fact that can't be argued. What can be argued is how much Tort's system contributed to that success. Maybe with a different system, we beat both the Sens and Caps in 5 games each. Maybe we beat the devils too. Or maybe we don't get out of the first round.

The point is, we don't really know. It isn't something we can measure. The fact that it was their best season since since 97 doesn't prove that either the system or the coach were the best fit for that team.

Or maybe the team falters and doesnt even make the playoffs. These what if scenarios mean nothing regarding the '11-12 season. Where they finished is where they finished. Its tangible.

The what if's scenario mean a lot more when it comes to why this coach was fired and if it was because these players refused to continue going the extra mile.
 
I once had the same teacher for 3 straight years. She was a nice woman but we were sick of her by the 2nd year. When we walked into classroom and it was her again...She was a very good teacher but it was too much. Same thing with Tortorella.

Then what? Did you have a new teacher that propelled you to Harvard?

Or did you just wind up getting sick of the next teacher too? This false narrative that every coach has a shelf life gives someone like Sather free reign to push the team's failures onto the coach year after year. After 13 years, you'd think we'd know better.
 
But as I mentioned previously, in Richards' case, the new system does not matter one iota. He was not physically prepared and showed up to camp out of shape last year.

The greatest chance for him to succeed is to work hard in the summer and come into camp in the best shape of his life. There's also the possibility that he is done as a player and no new system will help him there.

Absolutely. No coach can save Richards if he isn't in shape. If Richards is on the decline as a player then your not going to get much out of him regardless of where you put him. I was just saying all you can ask for out of a coach is to make the most out of what he is given and put his players in a position to succeed. If players believe their coach can put them in a position to succeed, hopefully they work that much harder for him.
 
I spend enough time bashing Sather. None of us are involved directly in the situation, so this is a place to share what you think happened.

I happen to think that the most likely scenario, by far, is that a handful of players' opinions led Sather to make a knee-jerk reaction into firing the coach. Call it conjecture if you like, but something strange happened, and if you're not going to provide what you think happened, then your lack of an argument means nothing to me.

You think firing Torts was knee-jerk? The writing was on the wall... and anyway if the only reason Sather axed him was because players came to him and voiced their displeasure than what is he supposed to do? The worst thing you can have your core group of players not want to play under their current head coach.

Torts lost the room. That much was obvious.
 
Then what? Did you have a new teacher that propelled you to Harvard?

Or did you just wind up getting sick of the next teacher too? This false narrative that every coach has a shelf life gives someone like Sather free reign to push the team's failures onto the coach year after year. After 13 years, you'd think we'd know better.

At the end of the day these are grown men that are getting yelled at by another grown man. I don't care who you are, your going to get sick of hearing his **** no matter how right/true it may be.
 
I once had the same teacher for 3 straight years. She was a nice woman but we were sick of her by the 2nd year. When we walked into classroom and it was her again...She was a very good teacher but it was too much. Same thing with Tortorella.
Doesn't sound remotely comparable to Tortorella. She sounds like the kind of person Tortorella would throw a water bottle at.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad