Thoughts On New Coaches?

[ncdoc]

I always felt the rangers had no structure the last few years, through gallant and quinn. They have some great players and I always felt like a system approach would take them to the next level. Last year felt like pond hockey. I hope these guys buy in. They may not be cup material but a solid system will take them far. Excited for this season,

 

[NickyFotiu]

I have been impressed watching some of the practice clips. They look well organized and energetic. Hoping Lav and his guys are the guys that can bring out that effort for this team.

 

[markymarc1215]

With a HOFer in Phil Housley and a bonafide Selke winner in Peca, our assistant coaches have serious cred for their on-ice accomplishments as well. I think that goes a long way in the locker room and in practice.

 

[gravey9]

I've also been saying for a while - if you could put the focus and attention on D and making Igors job easier with less high dangers and odd man rushes - you are playing to your strengths and youll get a lot of wins when hes between the pipes.

We've seen this team score goals as a result of making D the focus. Thats how it has to work. A lot of heady players on this team that need the structure and something specific to execute.

Not to mention with Igor - if hes handling the puck more - thats a great thing. Shades of Marty in the trap system. The puck wont be in his zone as much.

Less possession/high danger chances against + Vezina goalie = Wins

In addition, the focus on shot blocking point shots can make a big difference. Igor isn't the biggest goalie and the shots that tend to beat him (and also used to beat Hank) were those long shots through bodies. When those shots don't get through it removes a lot scrambles in front of our net too. It can make a big difference if we start shutting things down in front of Shesty and I love the neutral zone play. I harped on this last year, this team could be deadly off of turnovers and transition. But we didn't have the system to allow for much of that. Hopeful the system will make a big difference for everyone, from the younger players to guys like Panarin.

 

[HockeyBasedNYC]

In addition, the focus on shot blocking point shots can make a big difference. Igor isn't the biggest goalie and the shots that tend to beat him (and also used to beat Hank) were those long shots through bodies. When those shots don't get through it removes a lot scrambles in front of our net too. It can make a big difference if we start shutting things down in front of Shesty and I love the neutral zone play. I harped on this last year, this team could be deadly off of turnovers and transition. But we didn't have the system to allow for much of that. Hopeful the system will make a big difference for everyone, from the younger players to guys like Panarin.

Agree.

Vally pointed out that blocking could backfire on you if you don’t eat the shot. You become a screen. But it’s about those wingers way out that need to get a piece.

 

[NickyFotiu]

Agree.

Vally pointed out that blocking could backfire on you if you don’t eat the shot. You become a screen. But it’s about those wingers way out that need to get a piece.

I get concerned about injury. If the shot hits straight on the shinguard that is usually okay but there are multiple places where it can put a guy out of the lineup. Getting hit in the skates, back of the wrist, chest, etc can be a major issue.

 

[SeanAveryTheGreatOne]

Laviolette is a lot better than I anticipated. Gallant set a really low bar, for what it's worth.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

With a HOFer in Phil Housley and a bonafide Selke winner in Peca, our assistant coaches have serious cred for their on-ice accomplishments as well. I think that goes a long way in the locker room and in practice.

While I understand focusing on what they did as players, it's in no way a guarantee of them being a good coach. Wayne Gretzky is a perfect example of that.

Having talked to coaches across sports, the one question I always asked was "Why are star players rarely good coaches?" and consistently you hear them say that as players they had to put effort into getting to the NHL. They had to spend hours and hours and hours studying the game, reports, even video sessions and post-game recaps. They had to work hard and it taught them the game in a different way compared to star players. They had to learn the game at a higher level because they didn't have enough talent to get there without that work.

When I played semi-pro rugby, my head coach was a guy who would always explain how much he learned as a player and how much he would like to pass on to us. He played with some great players who failed as coaches. Yet he has since worked his way up and later coached at the highest level in South Africa. It's quite interesting to look at coaching from this perspective.

Sorry, I didn't mean to hijack your post. This just got me thinking of my own experiences.

 

[eco's bones]

Part of it is coaching is a commitment. Gretzky didn't really have a background in it and it's why when people in the past have brought up Messier it's WTF (?). Looking at someone like St. Louis. I don't know if he'll turn out great but after he retired he started with his kids but then worked at coaching at other levels. He's never left the game. Another thing is what comes more naturally to an elite player can't really be expected from most players who will have to work harder at aspects of the game than the elite player wouldn't necessarily have. It's understanding the talent limitations of players from top to bottom and how to fit them into the right roles.

Also the personnel of a team factors into how successful a coach will be. It's one of the reasons I never hated on Quinn who is pretty much doing the same thing all over again that he did with us in San Jose. That's not to say he was the greatest but when you're working with a lot of inexperienced kids and waiver fodder it does make a difference.

 

[Unpredictable1]

I think Lavi's the early favorite for Jack Adams. Gallant won last year's Sam Adams award for Drunk Coach of the Year.

I actually didn't mind Gallant but did question stuff he did or didn't do, but man this made me crack lol

Cheers.

(I have no idea what i did or if the steve harvy gif is playing for anyone else lol)

 

[Unpredictable1]

In terms of the coaching I feel there's a few positive stories going around the team that I place squarely on the coaching staff. Laf is one of them, but that's the easiest one to name.

I really like who we have on the bridge.

 

[TopShelfSnipes]

Overall very pleased. The work Peca and the staff have done with the team on faceoffs has been great. Happy with Laviolette, Muse, and Peca being much more consistent with the lines and not switching every time the team has a bad game - plus returning to combos that works imediately even if they change up things mid game.

The systems have been good but the implementation hasn't always been great, but it's been much better when executed correctly - especially breakouts. Biggest weakness I see currently is certain D keep pinching and getting caught, and it's not always the offensive ones.

But like I said, overall very pleased.

 

[CasusBelli]

No complaints. Peca will eventually be a HC.