Player Discussion Tony DeAngelo - Part II

[chosen]

If a player routinely pisses off the coach, there will always be resulting problems for the player. To think it should play out in any other way makes no sense.

 

[True Blue]

So with that universal truth written out, how would Quinn's treatment of ADA affect anyone else?

This been explained already yet you keep on asking the same question. If other players see that DeAgelo could simply ignore the rules set out for him by Quinn, that opens the door for rest of the team to believe that they can simply do what they want and not what management is preaching.

The idea that treating high lever or veteran players differently would lead to a mutiny or breed resentment is silly when you are talking about high schoolers. Its absurd when you are talking about a hundred million dollar business.

Or it's absurd to believe that in a culture where no one is held accountable, success is bred.

 

[True Blue]

He had a terrible turnover in the offensive zone that led to a breakaway and the Toronto goal. He also took an unnecessary tripping penalty later on. I don't know what his TOI breakdown looked like by period, but even aside from those two incidents, he just had a tough game. Just one of those nights. Hopefully he gets right back to it.

He did not have a good game. The turnover was awful. That said, hopefully he learns from it and is back at it the next game.

 

[McRanger]

This been explained already yet you keep on asking the same question. If other players see that DeAgelo could simply ignore the rules set out for him by Quinn, that opens the door for rest of the team to believe that they can simply do what they want and not what management is preaching.

Or it's absurd to believe that in a culture where no one is held accountable, success is bred.

Except that's the way it is on every team, at every level, in every sport.

I don't know if the Blackhawks had a rule specifically about not punching cabbies or if Patrick Kane was told "Dont do A" and A was punch cabbies but I think its safe to say assaulting someone violates some sort of team rule or coaches wish.

Yet he played the whole 09-10 season and they won the cup. Success was bred. And the idea that Brent Sopel or a 4th liner or some Rockford IceHog would have gotten the same treatment, or that those players would have even expected the same treatment, is laughable. No one cared he was getting a pass when they would not and no rookie thought "He assaulted a guy, I should assault a guy!" The only emotion anyone probably felt when Kane got off light was relief that their best player would be back on the ice, helping the team win and them score goals and all the players around him get paid more money.

So, again. Deangelo has two paths to staying in the lineup. He can do whatever it is Quinn wants to make his coach happy. Or he can make himself indispensable on the ice. And if's the 2nd path (or a combination of both) there will be zero effect on anyone around him, or their behavior, because everyone knows how this goes and its absurd to think otherwise.

 

[Hi ImHFNYR]

This I agree with. We saw it happen with the Mets where they basically let Harvey and Syndergaard to a lesser extend do what ever the **** they wanted...

OTOH, I think that DeAngelo's "anticts" get over analyzed and are more of people looking for something than something actually being off (See: Yesterday after he scored in the SO, more than one person here commented it on being maturity issues, when much worse happens/is said during a game.) .

I think his issues are likely overblown and that he just appears to be a player who needs a kick in the ass sometimes to keep him focused. I’m not absolving him, and I don’t see the harm in the odd benching right now. At some point, (and it appears it may have already happened), he needs to be accountable for his actions. But, not every young player grows up at the same time.

I read this as his actual issues are overblown, as in, people who talk about him having issues are greatly exaggerating his issues. I could be reading that wrong

Ironically I think the overblown part is when people argue in the opposite direction (I.e. it's overblown how people complain about him getting benched)

I've rarely seen people blow the issues out of proportion here. For example, very, very, very few people here are leaping to conclusions and saying "Get this problem child out of here, he's going to be a cancer forever". There are a small handful of posts talking about benching him for stupid reasons (Example: He chirped the bruins! Get that out of my hockey!). When I say small handful I mean REALLY small.

Comparatively I see a TON of people screaming day after day after day about how unfair his benching's have been. It has been a nonstop kvetchfest. The lengths people go to in order to justify their stance that ADA is being unfairly targeted? It's embarrassing. The word caricature came up awhile back and it's the best way I've heard to describe how far some folks have gone with their usual schtick in regards to ADA

If you think people have been overreacting to his issues then I really question where those posts are.

 

[LORDE]

Except that's the way it is on every team, at every level, in every sport.

I don't know if the Blackhawks had a rule specifically about not punching cabbies or if Patrick Kane was told "Dont do A" and A was punch cabbies but I think its safe to say assaulting someone violates some sort of team rule or coaches wish.

Yet he played the whole 09-10 season and they won the cup. Success was bred. And the idea that Brent Sopel or a 4th liner or some Rockford IceHog would have gotten the same treatment, or that those players would have even expected the same treatment, is laughable. No one cared he was getting a pass when they would not and no rookie thought "He assaulted a guy, I should assault a guy!" The only emotion anyone probably felt when Kane got off light was relief that their best player would be back on the ice, helping the team win and them score goals and all the players around him get paid more money.

So, again. Deangelo has two paths to staying in the lineup. He can do whatever it is Quinn wants to make his coach happy. Or he can make himself indispensable on the ice. And if's the 2nd path (or a combination of both) there will be zero effect on anyone around him, or their behavior, because everyone knows how this goes and its absurd to think otherwise.

OMG... and all the Giants have gone out and shot themselves because of Burress or have blown themselves up Wil-E-Coyote style because of Pierre-Paul?

This is a ridiculous comparison. A coach enforcing rules or guidelines or enforcing HOW he wants a player to play is COMPLETELY different that expecting pro players, MEN in fact to act by the rules of society. That should be a given.

When a coach is establishing a culture in and around a team I'm sure he assumes they won't be dealing drugs or raping women in their spare time. They are wrong at times and that is sad in and of itself but it's completely different from establishing a winning culture.

How ridiculous.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Except that's the way it is on every team, at every level, in every sport.

I don't know if the Blackhawks had a rule specifically about not punching cabbies or if Patrick Kane was told "Dont do A" and A was punch cabbies but I think its safe to say assaulting someone violates some sort of team rule or coaches wish.

Yet he played the whole 09-10 season and they won the cup. Success was bred. And the idea that Brent Sopel or a 4th liner or some Rockford IceHog would have gotten the same treatment, or that those players would have even expected the same treatment, is laughable. No one cared he was getting a pass when they would not and no rookie thought "He assaulted a guy, I should assault a guy!" The only emotion anyone probably felt when Kane got off light was relief that their best player would be back on the ice, helping the team win and them score goals and all the players around him get paid more money.

So, again. Deangelo has two paths to staying in the lineup. He can do whatever it is Quinn wants to make his coach happy. Or he can make himself indispensable on the ice. And if's the 2nd path (or a combination of both) there will be zero effect on anyone around him, or their behavior, because everyone knows how this goes and its absurd to think otherwise.

I think that's accurate in terms of DeAngelo's 2 paths.

I also think, like any good coach, Quinn is making DeAngelo go through his path in order to become indispensable on the ice. Considering the Rangers' situation, near the bottom of the standing in a rebuilding year, it can be argued that nobody's performance on the ice is indispensable.

Personally, I think DeAngelo is a better player than Pionk. Every metric says so. But I don't think the discrepancy is so great that it gives DeAngelo license to be an asshole around the team when consistently being told not to. He needs to clean up his act.

 

[Hi ImHFNYR]

Except that's the way it is on every team, at every level, in every sport.

I don't know if the Blackhawks had a rule specifically about not punching cabbies or if Patrick Kane was told "Dont do A" and A was punch cabbies but I think its safe to say assaulting someone violates some sort of team rule or coaches wish.

Yet he played the whole 09-10 season and they won the cup. Success was bred. No one cared he was getting a pass when they would not and no rookie thought "He assaulted a guy, I should assault a guy!"

This part of your post is a really abysmal, poorly thought out, superficial counter argument.

Talk about missing the forest for the trees.

My favorite was how you likened the completely different case of ADA having repeat hockey related issues to a single case of assault. Then tried to imply that there is no difference between the way players would view and be influenced by

a single instance of off the ice CRIME

compared to

how they would view a guy getting away with f***ing specific things up on the ice day after day

 

[bleedblue94]

If a player routinely pisses off the coach, there will always be resulting problems for the player. To think it should play out in any other way makes no sense.

To that point, why is everyone convinced it's an issue of ADA and DQ, and not DQ responding to thing(s) that are affecting other players on the team as well? The bottom line is that we do not know and it is all speculation, but at the end of the day DQ is the guy that is going to make the decisions so those decisions become associated with him...

 

[True Blue]

So, again. Deangelo has two paths to staying in the lineup. He can do whatever it is Quinn wants to make his coach happy. Or he can make himself indispensable on the ice. And if's the 2nd path (or a combination of both) there will be zero effect on anyone around him, or their behavior, because everyone knows how this goes and its absurd to think otherwise.

Why is this mutually exclusive? Maybe by doing A (doing what Quinn demands), he accomplishes B (making himself indispensable). What is absurd is to stick to a belief that when a player regularly ignores what the coach is telling him to do and then is rewarded by continued ice time, that other players will not start to act in a similar manner. Which negatively affects the team.

 

[True Blue]

Comparatively I see a TON of people screaming day after day after day about how unfair his benching's have been. It has been a nonstop kvetchfest. The lengths people go to in order to justify their stance that ADA is being unfairly targeted? It's embarrassing. The word caricature came up awhile back and it's the best way I've heard to describe how far some folks have gone with their usual schtick in regards to ADA

I actually do not think that I have seen another such player, where his legions of devotees demanding that he get preferential treatment.

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

Why is this mutually exclusive? Maybe by doing A (doing what Quinn demands), he accomplishes B (making himself indispensable). What is absurd is to stick to a belief that when a player regularly ignores what the coach is telling him to do and then is rewarded by continued ice time, that other players will not start to act in a similar manner. Which negatively affects the team.

They seem to be pretty good paths. In fact, those two paths seem like they would overlap quite a bit.

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

I actually do not think that I have seen another such player, where his legions of devotees demanding that he get preferential treatment.

There have been others....

 

[True Blue]

There have been others....

To be honest, I struggle with thinking of who

They seem to be pretty good paths. In fact, those two paths seem like they would overlap quite a bit.

You would think. DeAngelo makes himself indispensable by playing well and conducting himself well. The notion that he does this by doing things contrary to what is being preached to him by management seems silly. In that case, why bother having a coach at all for him? Why not just have him come in for games and provide brilliance?

 

[offdacrossbar]

im still struggling with the immediate retribution directed at ADA for his on ice mistakes or misplays or fouls or whatever it is he does or doesnt do wrong according to quinn. his leash does appear to be much shorter than any other player on the roster. quinn seems to have a quick trigger when not comes to mr deangelo.

there are 2 factors at play here.

1. his attitude/maturity issues re. behavior, chirping, and what ever it is he does to upset quinn.

2. his on ice play re. fouls, penalties, poor play, results, corsi, production, etc.

there are 2 simple fixes for ADA.

play PERFECT mistake free hockey, ala, neal pionk, marc staal, adam mcquaid, brendan smith and kevin shattenkirk and stay on the ice. i laugh at all the bad passes, poor 2 on 1's, missed assignments and generally lousy defensive play that those 4 produce, yet they are all teflon for the most part.

clean up your act re. your maturity and your anger on ice. od what quinn says and dont do what he says not to do.

its up to him at this point.

i have zero problem with his edgy play and his swag and cocky attitude on the ice as long as it goes no father than a "toe over the line".

his still a kid and defensively hes a gambler and so hes gonna make mistakes and not be perfect. hes gonna have those kinda nights. i know, crazy right ????!!!!

still cant get on board with the methods employed by quinn. he seems to me to be very petty and not overly consistent with his "lessons".

 

[Hi ImHFNYR]

im still struggling with the immediate retribution directed at ADA for his on ice mistakes or misplays or fouls or whatever it is he does or doesnt do wrong according to quinn. his leash does appear to be much shorter than any other player on the roster. .

I do not think it appears that way at all. Everything we are seeing across his whole career makes it appear that he simply makes more mistakes than anyone else and is facing consequences more as a result. Nothing suggests that he is penalized extra harshly for the same number of mistakes.

And the "consequences" are missing games while the coach clearly keeps a direct, clear line of communication open with him. Seems about as normal and fair a leash as you can give

still cant get on board with the methods employed by quinn. he seems to me to be very petty and not overly consistent with his "lessons".

Nothing suggests this if you actually look at all the facts and information we currently have. You keep blowing off what doesn't fit your narrative...which as TB has shown many times...means you're blowing off pretty much everything you're seeing and hearing

 

[True Blue]

im still struggling with the immediate retribution directed at ADA for his on ice mistakes or misplays or fouls or whatever it is he does or doesnt do wrong according to quinn. his leash does appear to be much shorter than any other player on the roster. quinn seems to have a quick trigger when not comes to mr deangelo.

Aside from Staal & McQuaid (who was hurt for a stretch of time), who has not been scratched from the defense?

play PERFECT mistake free hockey, ala, neal pionk, marc staal, adam mcquaid, brendan smith and kevin shattenkirk and stay on the ice. i laugh at all the bad passes, poor 2 on 1's, missed assignments and generally lousy defensive play that those 4 produce, yet they are all teflon for the most part.

You keep coming back and completely ignoring specifically what Quinn said. He is more than willing to live with mistakes, if the mistakes come from good intentions. And, apparently there are items besides the actual play dealing with maturity. You are right. It is up to him. Either he will or he will not listen.

his still a kid and defensively hes a gambler and so hes gonna make mistakes and not be perfect. hes gonna have those kinda nights. i know, crazy right ????!!!!

Again, completely ignoring words that Quinn has specified.

still cant get on board with the methods employed by quinn. he seems to me to be very petty and not overly consistent with his "lessons".

DeAngelo was having a pretty bad night. Was he supposed to get rewarded with more ice time?

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

im still struggling with the immediate retribution directed at ADA for his on ice mistakes or misplays or fouls or whatever it is he does or doesnt do wrong according to quinn. his leash does appear to be much shorter than any other player on the roster. quinn seems to have a quick trigger when not comes to mr deangelo.

there are 2 factors at play here.

1. his attitude/maturity issues re. behavior, chirping, and what ever it is he does to upset quinn.

2. his on ice play re. fouls, penalties, poor play, results, corsi, production, etc.

Every player is different. And a coach will learn how to reach a player or figure out what a player needs. And those methods may vary from player to player but the end goal is the same—to get them to be better. For one guy it might be a look. For another it might be a pat in the back and a nudge. For another is might be more severe.

there are 2 simple fixes for ADA.


play PERFECT mistake free hockey, ala, neal pionk, marc staal, adam mcquaid, brendan smith and kevin shattenkirk and stay on the ice. i laugh at all the bad passes, poor 2 on 1's, missed assignments and generally lousy defensive play that those 4 produce, yet they are all teflon for the most part.

How is pointing to Pionk or Staal or Smith or McQuid or any other player's poor as endorsement of ADA's play? Perhaps Quinn has a higher expectations—not standards—but expectations because ADA was a first round pick and is very talented. Why would Quinn give a damn if Smith or McQuaid or even Staal maximize their play as none of them really are part of long-term plans here? Maybe he has a lower expectation—not standard—but expectations of Pionk who is nowhere near the talent that ADA is and might actually be overachieving by merely playing in the NHL.

clean up your act re. your maturity and your anger on ice. od what quinn says and dont do what he says not to do.

its up to him at this point.

I think that's all Quinn is saying and it should that is asking all that much.

i have zero problem with his edgy play and his swag and cocky attitude on the ice as long as it goes no father than a "toe over the line".

his still a kid and defensively hes a gambler and so hes gonna make mistakes and not be perfect. hes gonna have those kinda nights. i know, crazy right ????!!!![/QUOTE]

In all honesty, I don't either. It's his grit and swagger that sets him apart from other d-men on this team. He is still learning and will make mistakes. It comes down to how he handles criticism, which, honestly seems like he takes it better than his devotees do.

still cant get on board with the methods employed by quinn. he seems to me to be very petty and not overly consistent with his "lessons".

Again:
Every player is different. And a coach will learn how to reach a player or figure out what a player needs. And those methods may vary from player to player but the end goal is the same—to get them to be better. For one guy it might be a look. For another it might be a pat in the back and a nudge. For another is might be more severe. A coach is going to be more severe on a guy where there's obvious talent and potential.

 

[LORDE]

I'd call it a horrific night actually. That pass was so bad that I'm not sure I've seen that level of horrid since my high school coach tried me at defense on the PP once lol

 

[duhmetreE]

 

[Harbour Dog]

ADA had a monumental f*** up last night on the Kapanen goal and he never missed a shift. Then he continued to have a generally bad game (by anybody's standards), and Quinn cut his ice time back because of it.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with that. I'd bet that Quinn is happy enough to play him next game and show him that he DOES have a leash to learn on as long as he doesn't cross whatever behavioural lines they've had discussions about.

 

[Miamipuck]

I am not a fanboy or anything and yes ADA had that horrible pass and the penalty but aside from that night his game wasn't as awful as everyone is making out to be. He still moved the puck better than most of the other defenseman on the team. I watched the entire game and skimmed thru it again and I had a problem with a bunch of other players moreso than ADA. Every player makes big mistakes, I don't mind that. I mind the continual little mistakes over and over again.

 

[McRanger]

OMG... and all the Giants have gone out and shot themselves because of Burress or blow themselves up Wil-E-Coyote style because of Pierre-Paul?

Well they wouldn't, which was my point.

If a crappy WR shot himself or a backup backup DE blew his fingers off, they would have been cut with little fanfare, and their careers would likely be over. I would guess "permanently disfiguring yourself" if pretty high on a coaches list of "dont do's".

Which, again, is the point. The better a player is the more crap a coach (or whoever) is willing to put up with and the odds of players emulating others stupidity because they get more slack is minimal.

This is a ridiculous comparison. A coach enforcing rules or guidelines or enforcing HOW he wants a player to play is COMPLETELY different that expecting pro players, MEN in fact to act by the rules of society. That should be a given.

Except we are talking about how players behave off the ice, so I agree with you?

When a coach is establishing a culture in and around a team I'm sure he assumes they won't be dealing drugs or raping women in their spare time. They are wrong at times and that is sad in and of itself but it's completely different from establishing a winning culture.

How ridiculous.

Frankly the concept of a building a "winning culture" is ridiculous. Team cultures are all completely different and only determined to be "winning" after they've won. You build a team to win on the ice using a combination of hard work and most importantly skill. If you disregard either for the other you are going to have a tough time, but especially the latter.

 

[McRanger]

This part of your post is a really abysmal, poorly thought out, superficial counter argument.

Talk about missing the forest for the trees.

My favorite was how you likened the completely different case of ADA having repeat hockey related issues to a single case of assault. Then tried to imply that there is no difference between the way players would view and be influenced by

a single instance of off the ice CRIME

compared to

how they would view a guy getting away with ****ing specific things up on the ice day after day

I chose the most idiotically simplistic example out there of how great players are treated differently and how the concept of "equal accountability for all" is horseshit. The fact that they treated him one way and absolutely would have treated another player differently is the forest, the trees, the shrubs, everything.

(Also LOL at Patrick Kane having a "single instance". That guy is the poster child for off ice behavioral headaches.)

Kane is a star and he is going to play unless he retires or stops being a star. They will play him through tabloid fodder, they will play him if he decides to take a few shifts or games off, they will play him if he yells at refs or sasses his coach. The less effective he is on the ice, the less they are going to put up with his nonsense. And its the same up and down the lineup. Of every lineup. Everywhere.

 

[McRanger]

Why is this mutually exclusive? Maybe by doing A (doing what Quinn demands), he accomplishes B (making himself indispensable).

Sure. Of course that only makes sense if A is something that is consequential to winning games. And I mean is actually important on the ice, not just that Quinn really really values it.There is a pretty big gap between telling your players to not hurt the team by get penalties for screaming at the ref and something like Lou Lam's no facial hair rule. Which is why the lack of specificity about this whole thing is kind of annoying.

Anyway my guess is it is a combination of the 2 paths: if ADA honestly tries to do what Quinn wants (even if he doesn't always succeed) and regularly proves that he is one of the Rangers better D-men, he will find himself as a fixture in the lineup. And life will go on without anyone caring that ADA gets treated differently because EVERY player gets treated differently.

And that is what we want from Quinn. It doesn't matter whether he threatens, encourages, cajoles or tricks them, he was hired to squeeze WHAT HE CAN out of every player. Its not binary where he either gets the players to act perfect or nothing.

What would our teams cup drought be at if Keenan benched Kovalev every time he ignored him?

What is absurd is to stick to a belief that when a player regularly ignores what the coach is telling him to do and then is rewarded by continued ice time, that other players will not start to act in a similar manner. Which negatively affects the team.

Sorry but the idea that a young player is going to risk his ice time (and his career and millions of dollars) so he can emulate the team loaf or the team goof while ignoring the rest of the teams veteran leadership is absurd on multiple levels. Quinn has favorites and blind spots just like every other human on the planet and no one is going to crumble because of them.