Jump to content
  • Join us — it's free!

    We are the premiere internet community for New York Rangers news and fan discussion. Don't wait — join the forum today!

IGNORED

Rangers, Jackets Could Battle Over Gallant


Phil

Recommended Posts

Can someone explain to me why Rod the Bod is considered a better coach than Gallant? Gallant has had way more success.

 

"Better" is an opinion in my book, 31.

 

The fact that I simply like Brind'Amour better for the Rangers is simply my opinion.

 

Pete raised a good point a while back when he said something to the effect of Gallant, although with his successes, has been relieved of his duties a couple of times because of some reason...What that reason is I don't know but in my book, where there's smoke...there's fire.

 

I liked Brind'Amour as a player, and his coaching style seems to follow suit. That style is what I would like to see with this current Rangers roster. I just think he would fit perfectly.

 

That's just my take though ;)

 

Edit...I'm not dead set against Gallant though...if or when he becomes coach I'll be behind him 100%...it's just I have other coaches rated above him...(Brind'amour, Quenneville, and Tocchet)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 180
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I feel like Brind'amour benefits from not having Gallant's questionable history and he's known for embracing analytics more. That said, I'm not worried about Gallant's history and he's said that analytics form like 30% of his opinion which feels appropriate. That aside, they're both players' coaches with little difference.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never said he was. I said he’d be the only one on the list Brooks posted that I’d have interest in, but that I still prefer Gallant.

 

Not saying you did, just commenting on the general sentiment that he's the guy they're holding out hope for and he's the pipe dream coach, etc. Like, why? What has he done that makes him the best candidate? I feel like I'm missing something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gotcha.

 

I guess because of the work he’s done in Carolina. They play a similar in your face brand kind of like the Islanders, and their defensive structure has been highly touted.

 

Again though, it’s right pieces for the right guy. Gallant seems to be able to adjust well wherever he goes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not saying you did, just commenting on the general sentiment that he's the guy they're holding out hope for and he's the pipe dream coach, etc. Like, why? What has he done that makes him the best candidate? I feel like I'm missing something.

 

For me, I think he checks a lot of boxes of what I was looking for. Most importantly, I want a recent player. I think they have a better understanding of the game, lockerroom, development of players, etc. Old, recycled coaches look like career politicians for me - too far away from the daily interactions, and think they're the most important person ever.

The type of player and leader Brind'amour was during his playing days also helps. This team desperately needs leadership.

Based on post-Quinn mentionings, they need someone they can look up to and respect. But also demanding. And dedicated.

He's also gotten a lot out of some of his skilled players - and has been there the last years as an assistant working with player development.

 

I listed off a bunch of other guys that didnt have NHL experience, but could be similar coaching types.

 

I mentioned Drury over a year ago about taking over behind the bench, Rod is of a similar ilk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree on the points on Brind’Amour. I definitely investigate it whether he is available and/or interested. I just don’t see it happening; too much history there for him, too much respect from management. I think they find common ground on a deal. I mentioned that to me, he was the only one of few coaches Brooks’ mentioned that I’d personally have interest in. I just don’t think that situation is going to be close to ironed out by the time Gallant decides on what he wants to do. From the sounds of it, it sounds like there’s a chance Gallant is named HC somewhere within the next little while here. I would hate to miss on him and also watch Brind’Amour remain with Carolina, because those are the 2 best people for this job IMO. Drastically different, but each bring elements this team needs in different ways.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree on the points on Brind’Amour. I definitely investigate it whether he is available and/or interested. I just don’t see it happening; too much history there for him, too much respect from management. I think they find common ground on a deal. I mentioned that to me, he was the only one of few coaches Brooks’ mentioned that I’d personally have interest in. I just don’t think that situation is going to be close to ironed out by the time Gallant decides on what he wants to do. From the sounds of it, it sounds like there’s a chance Gallant is named HC somewhere within the next little while here. I would hate to miss on him and also watch Brind’Amour remain with Carolina, because those are the 2 best people for this job IMO. Drastically different, but each bring elements this team needs in different ways.

 

I don't think the Rangers will miss out on anyone. They're likely to be the #1 landing spot for a coach right now. That said, the playoffs are now into the 3rd round. It seems like if anyone was going to shake free, it would have happened already. Seems like Drury's MO is to be thoughtful and methodical. I'd imagine some kind of decision is close.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me, I think he checks a lot of boxes of what I was looking for. Most importantly, I want a recent player. I think they have a better understanding of the game, lockerroom, development of players, etc. Old, recycled coaches look like career politicians for me - too far away from the daily interactions, and think they're the most important person ever.

The type of player and leader Brind'amour was during his playing days also helps. This team desperately needs leadership.

Based on post-Quinn mentionings, they need someone they can look up to and respect. But also demanding. And dedicated.

He's also gotten a lot out of some of his skilled players - and has been there the last years as an assistant working with player development.

 

I listed off a bunch of other guys that didnt have NHL experience, but could be similar coaching types.

 

I mentioned Drury over a year ago about taking over behind the bench, Rod is of a similar ilk.

 

To add, I think it's important to have a guy who never really coasted on talent. Guys like Brindamour, Tocchet, and Drury who had to really work to be great tend to know how to convey that work ethic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think the Rangers will miss out on anyone. They're likely to be the #1 landing spot for a coach right now. That said, the playoffs are now into the 3rd round. It seems like if anyone was going to shake free, it would have happened already. Seems like Drury's MO is to be thoughtful and methodical. I'd imagine some kind of decision is close.

 

I definitely think the Rangers are arguably the most attractive opening. I doubt they will “miss” on anyone. But, if Gallant wants a decision and the Rangers become hesitant because of, let’s say, Brind’Amour, I wouldn’t then be surprised to see him pivot toward CBJ. And to me, that’s a messy situation because then if you don’t land Brind’Amour, where to next?

 

At the end of the day, I fully expect a Gallant/NYR union. It makes sense on a lot of levels, and to me I truly believe he’s the best coach available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No matter who our next coach is, we need the players who will play the kind of game we clamor for. See last night’s Isles v. Boston? Yeah, coaching. But YEAH players. NYR are not either of those teams. Not yet.

 

It feels like we lack that extra gear that can make teams great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It feels like we lack that extra gear that can make teams great.

 

Which is fine it’s all part of the process. You get talent first, teach it to win and then add depth. Depending on what drury does this off season this team is still at least 2 years from being a legit playoff team.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which is fine it’s all part of the process. You get talent first, teach it to win and then add depth. Depending on what drury does this off season this team is still at least 2 years from being a legit playoff team.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

It is definitely going to be a process, but I'd be ok sacrificing the next 2 seasons for a 10 year run being a perennial contender for the cup, Nashty! :thumbs:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you believe you are still 2 years away from competing, you can't trade away any of the kids or prospects. You'll need entry-level contracts. Plus, who knows what someone like Eichel vs Kakko looks like in 2 seasons.

 

I think Drury is going to set them up to take a big step forward this season, adding that leadership and muscle. But complimentary pieces, not a big fish. After next season, they'll have a better idea of what they'll have in Lafreniere, Kakko, Miller, Kravtsov, etc. That offseason, Strome and Zibanejad are up for contracts. I think that's when you determine if you need a big piece to add.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you believe you are still 2 years away from competing, you can't trade away any of the kids or prospects. You'll need entry-level contracts. Plus, who knows what someone like Eichel vs Kakko looks like in 2 seasons.

 

I think Drury is going to set them up to take a big step forward this season, adding that leadership and muscle. But complimentary pieces, not a big fish. After next season, they'll have a better idea of what they'll have in Lafreniere, Kakko, Miller, Kravtsov, etc. That offseason, Strome and Zibanejad are up for contracts. I think that's when you determine if you need a big piece to add.

 

They’re def going to try to rush the process. I don’t agree with it but I understand it.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They’re def going to try to rush the process. I don’t agree with it but I understand it.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I dont think it is rushing anything. I feel like step 1 was the fire sale. Step 2 was the acquisition of young talent. Step 3 was the signings of Panarin and Trouba as leaders on the front and back end. Step 4 was our luck with the 1st and 2nd overall draft picks. The final step is adding the character and leadership to take this team to a championship. There may be hiccups on the way but we are certainly competing for playoffs next year with some tactical moves this summer. I think this team becomes a perennial contender after this year and may even surprise and take a HUGE step forward this season. I dont think we have two more throw aways, not with this team and all of the things done right through out this rebuild. They did it right and imo are continuing to do so by changing management to take this next step.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...