Who Do You (Realistically) Want to be the Next Head Coach of the New York Rangers?

[Cynical TyranT]

It's getting scary.

It's like Sather said, "Hey, this team is looking like a future powerhouse, I better jump in and customize it so I can get the credit after Gorton did all the hard work."

Aka The Pat Riley

 

[Adam Fox Time]

It's getting scary.

It's like Sather said, "Hey, this team is looking like a future powerhouse, I better jump in and customize it so I can get the credit after Gorton did all the hard work."

If Gorton wanted to keep Quinn, he had no interested in the Rangers being a winning team.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Hey guys!!! Let’s Panic for no reason whatsoever

 

[HockeyBasedNYC]

Tocchet seems to have built the up-and-coming reputation for himself. I admittedly haven't paid much attention to his work with the Coyotes over the past several seasons but from what I hear he's got a lot out of the roster he had there. I think it's evident he is well received around the league given all of the interviews he's had. But with a career coaching record of .475 he's nothing to really rave about.

Gallant on the other hand will probably have a second interview when he gets back from Latvia, if this coaching search is indeed a thorough one. I think he's at the top of Drury's list for sure. And comparatively he has a .550 coaching record, with a winning record in playoff games to boot - where Tocchet has little experience.

It would be a just a bit hypocritical to decapitate the upper end of the front office because patience has "run out" on developing and then go out and hire a coach who has losing coaching record and 9 playoff games on his resume.

Between the two of them does anyone know Tocchet's view on analytics? I know Gallant's view was misrepresented in the media, he doesn't dismiss it, it was just crazy what the Panthers wanted him to do with all of the in-game adjustments. But it would be great to be a fly on the wall in these interviews to hear if it is playing a larger role.

Personally I would stick with Gallant if he wants the job. He's improved with each job he's had. Hes been to the finals. He has 3 division titles and a conference title. He has close to a .600 win percentage in his last 6 seasons. Dont f*** around. Bring him in.

 

[SA16]

Tocchet seems to have built the up-and-coming reputation for himself. I admittedly haven't paid much attention to his work with the Coyotes over the past several seasons but from what I hear he's got a lot out of the roster he had there. I think it's evident he is well received around the league given all of the interviews he's had. But with a career coaching record of .475 between the WHL and NHL he's nothing to really rave about.

Gallant on the other hand will probably have a second interview when he gets back from Latvia, if this coaching search is indeed a thorough one. I think he's at the top of Drury's list for sure. And comparatively he has a .550 coaching record all at the NHL level, with a winning record in playoff games to boot - where Tocchet has zero experience.

It would be a just a bit hypocritical to decapitate the upper end of the front office because patience has "run out" on developing and then go out and hire a coach who has losing coaching record and zero playoff experience as a coach.

Between the two of them does anyone know Tocchet's view on analytics? I know Gallant's view was misrepresented in the media, he doesn't dismiss it, it was just crazy what the Panthers wanted him to do with all of the in-game adjustments. But it would be great to be a fly on the wall in these interviews to hear if it is playing a larger role.

Personally I would stick with Gallant if he wants the job. He's improved with each job he's had. Hes been to the finals. He has 3 first place division finishes. He has close to a .600 win percentage in his last 6 seasons. Dont f*** around. Bring him in.

You can almost replace "Gallant" in this with "Vigneault" and it would fit almost perfect. He has 7 first place finishes the last 14 years. He's been to the finals twice. He's won 55% of games the last 6 years with a 65% points percentage. He has a winning record in the playoffs. He supposedly had a "sophisticated stats package" that they used.

Nobody would want to bring him in if he was available.

 

[Savant]

I would not have a problem with Tocchet. Not sure who else would have done better in Arizona. Would like to see what he can do with better resources. Definitely fits what management is looking for too. Rangers could do a lot worse.

 

[Machinehead]

You can almost replace "Gallant" in this with "Vigneault" and it would fit almost perfect. He has 7 first place finishes the last 14 years. He's been to the finals twice. He's won 55% of games the last 6 years with a 65% points percentage. He has a winning record in the playoffs. He supposedly had a "sophisticated stats package" that they used.

Nobody would want to bring him in if he was available.

Has Gallant had Hall of Fame goaltending throughout his career?

 

[Glen Sathers Cigar]

I honestly would've kept DQ and Martin and replaced the other assistants instead of hiring Tocchet.

 

[The Crypto Guy]

Isnt Tocchet a defensive minded coach? Is that what we want with a team oozing with offensive talent?

He also doesnt seem to have done much in terms of developing his young stars in PHX. Keller looked like he was going to be a superstar, not anymore.

 

[Calad]

I would not have a problem with Tocchet. Not sure who else would have done better in Arizona. Would like to see what he can do with better resources. Definitely fits what management is looking for too. Rangers could do a lot worse.

A boring defensive style, where the team plays dumb and chase, shots from the point, and dont posess the puck? I hope to god that is not what management wants.

 

[Savant]

Let’s see what he does with better personnel. Was known for being physical as a player and that’s what management wants. Needs to pass that down. Also familiarity with division from being in Sullivan’s staff. I’d rather have a guy with Tocchet style that you mentioned than a hug like Boudreau who has no idea how to set up a defense

 

[HockeyBasedNYC]

You can almost replace "Gallant" in this with "Vigneault" and it would fit almost perfect. He has 7 first place finishes the last 14 years. He's been to the finals twice. He's won 55% of games the last 6 years with a 65% points percentage. He has a winning record in the playoffs. He supposedly had a "sophisticated stats package" that they used.

Nobody would want to bring him in if he was available.

You are crazy if you think no one would hire AV if he was available tomorrow. An owner will sign up for a better shot at playoff revenue anytime. Even if its a series. Especially after Covid

I see the comparisons but I don't really see the relevance to your comment and how it should apply to Gallant for the Rangers. So whats the alternative? To play the lottery with rookie coach? To hire an up-and-comer with a sub .500 track record?

Every coach is different.

AV has had 18 years to prove it. Gallant has had half that. If you want to throw out the beginning years we can apply that to Gallant as well.

Gallant had his first stint with Columbus for 3 years with a sub .500 record. AV had Montreal for 4, also with a sub .500. From that thinking you have a coach in Gallant who had 3 division wins and a trip to the cup in 6 years with a first year expansion team. I'd say he's much more of a unproven coach about to hit his stride than an AV who's won a ton of regular season games but cant get the job done in the postseason.

 

[SA16]

You are crazy if you think no one would hire AV if he was available tomorrow. An owner will sign up for a better shot at playoff revenue anytime. Even if its a series. Especially after Covid

I see the comparisons but I don't really see the relevance to your comment and how it should apply to Gallant for the Rangers. So whats the alternative? To play the lottery with rookie coach? To hire an up-and-comer with a sub .500 track record?

Every coach is different.

AV has had 18 years to prove it. Gallant has had half that. If you want to throw out the beginning years we can apply that to Gallant as well.

Gallant had his first stint with Columbus for 3 years with a sub .500 record. AV had Montreal for 4, also with a sub .500. From that thinking you have a coach in Gallant who had 3 division wins and a trip to the cup in 6 years with a first year expansion team. I'd say he's much more of a unproven coach about to hit his stride than an AV who's won a ton of regular season games but cant get the job done in the postseason.

Sorry - when I said nobody I was referring to the Rangers fanbase and not the league.

My point is nobody knows who will and who won't work. All the good points you made about Gallant can also be applied to AV and we saw how that worked out and how the fanbase feels about him.

Maybe Gallant is the best option, maybe he isn't, but we really can't sit here and say we know for sure just going off how his teams have done. There are so many factors that influence a coaches record.

For example, let's just look at the coaches for the division winners this year:

Brind'amour - hired with 0 NHL head coaching experience
Sullivan - hired with 2 years of coaching experience 10 years prior to getting his job
Keefe - hired with 0 NHL head coaching experience
Bednar - hired with 0 NHL head coaching experience

And the second place teams

Quenneville - lots of experience success
Laviolette - lots of experience/success
Tippett - lots of experience but had missed the playoffs in 5 straight years - no finals appearances. 553 wings in 1114 games.
Deboer - lots of experience. Had a losing record before joining Vegas with 415 wins in 855 games

It's all over the place. This isn't exactly a science.

 

[East Coast Bias]

There is no much parity in this league. The biggest takeaway for me watching these playoffs isn't "we couldn't handle this" - it's "wow so many of these teams are all the same."

The best chance of winning a cup is building a solid core, and not overreacting when it doesn't work one year. You tweak supporting cast, and you don't nuke your team when you have a bad end to the season. In the past decade 7 teams have won a cup, 14 made a final. The Bruins, Caps, Tampa, the Blues. All had years of spectacular flame outs before they didn't. The Sharks, Dallas, Nashvile all went 6 games in the finals and a few bounces the other way are cup winners.

Get Gallant, tighten up the system. Make a couple bottom 6 tweaks, don't play Howden or Hajek b/c they suck. Stay healthy and start a run where you're running head first into a wall for years, seemingly falling short until you don't. Because that's how it works.

 

[CLW]

There is no much parity in this league. The biggest takeaway for me watching these playoffs isn't "we couldn't handle this" - it's "wow so many of these teams are all the same."

The best chance of winning a cup is building a solid core, and not overreacting when it doesn't work one year. You tweak supporting cast, and you don't nuke your team when you have a bad end to the season. In the past decade 7 teams have won a cup, 14 made a final. The Bruins, Caps, Tampa, the Blues. All had years of spectacular flame outs before they didn't. The Sharks, Dallas, Nashvile all went 6 games in the finals and a few bounces the other way are cup winners.

Get Gallant, tighten up the system. Make a couple bottom 6 tweaks, don't play Howden or Hajek b/c they suck. Stay healthy and start a run where you're running head first into a wall for years, seemingly falling short until you don't. Because that's how it works.

I don't want more of the boring, old, same. The Islanders, Pens, Caps, Boston are totally uninteresting teams. Hiring Tocchet would point to exactly that. That's why teams like Colorado and the Panthers felt like fresh air. Sure the Panthers have their holes in the roster which scuppered them but at least they didn't look like half a dozen other teams out there. I hope Colorado wins just so they break the boring approach. It's by no means certain they will, Tampa look very solid and have a lot of experience so they are the clear favorites but an Avs win would be sweet.

 

[CLW]

Let’s see what he does with better personnel. Was known for being physical as a player and that’s what management wants. Needs to pass that down. Also familiarity with division from being in Sullivan’s staff. I’d rather have a guy with Tocchet style that you mentioned than a hug like Boudreau who has no idea how to set up a defense

Gretzky was known as a hockey genius. Alas, that didn't translate to his coaching career. It's the same with Tocchet. Name recognition, but hasn't done anything interesting in his coaching career. He runs the same old system and gets by on being an NHL icon with a premium membership in the Old Boy club.

 

[Savant]

Gretzky was known as a hockey genius. Alas, that didn't translate to his coaching career. It's the same with Tocchet. Name recognition, but hasn't done anything interesting in his coaching career. He runs the same old system and gets by on being an NHL icon with a premium membership in the Old Boy club.

I think taking the Coyotes to the playoffs is interesting. He has basically had one job. Is he Scotty Bowman? No. Is anyone this cycle? No. Rangers could do a lot worse.

 

[cwede]

have any sources mentioned Capuano?
doing well at Worlds with a real patchwork USA roster

maybe head to head w Gallant on Sunday ...