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

A Different Angle on AV


Giacomin
 Share

Recommended Posts

A lot of discussion about AV. A lot of talk about whether we are Cup competitive. Good Ranger fans (plus guys like Friedman) believe it is time to sell. Let's say that line of thinking is accurate and mgmt follows that course of action. Then would it not stand to reason that it is time to fire AV, for various reasons related to that decision?

 

I bet many would agree. One obvious reason is the team failed. Another would be the team needs a fresh start. Etc, etc.

 

However, there is one major and most compelling reason (THE REASON, IMO) that mgmt should then fire AV. AV is not a teaching/developmental coach. Players do not grow enough under his coaching.

 

If we are rebuilding and adding more draft choices/prospects, while jettisoning heady seasoned vets like Nash and Grabs (not to mention McD and Zuc), isn't it critical we bring on a coach that can groom the new group?

 

I contend, young players do not improve enough in the NHL under his leadership. Too many underperform and many don't hit their potential. The same can be said for many new additions.

 

There are definitely exceptions, Pouliot and Grabner come to mind. Yet, I started thinking about how many of the players, successful during AV's tenure, received the bulk of their post draft development (honed their skills and chops) under others. Torts, for instance. He played a large role helping many of our recent core, grow as players.

 

At this point, to evaluate, I started a list (below) of 'new' players under AV that have not progressed to expectations. BTW, which inspired this thread. Please see the theme, trying not to nitpick one single example.

 

* Jon Moore - been real solid for Devils last two years, Now a #1. Fast with size. Had tools, AV demoted to 6/7.

 

* MDZ - his career collapsed under AV. Revived some in Philly.

 

* JT Miller - for a physically mature guy he has developed slower than I hoped. Invisible in playoffs last year and year before.

 

* Kreids - should be even better than he is. Invisible in almost every game in last year's playoffs. Wasn't his best playoff under Torts?

 

* Stralman - AV talked Stralman down the day we acquired Klein. He never fully realized his potential. Stralman was key to our Cup run and should have been the #1, instead of G, against LA. Tampa put him on the top pair and whipped us the following year.

 

* Duclair - couldn't do shit for him, sent him down. Maybe no one can, but still a fail.

 

* Dom Moore - he regressed. AV let his inclination to play selfish emerge. Dom played horrible - mentally - his last year here.

 

* Stempniak - always a contributor except his half year under AV. Left and career fully revived.

 

* Martin St louis - came here hot and immediately stopped producing. Until tragedy lifted him and the team in the playoffs. Attribute to character, not AV's usage. Game fell off following year, AV stuck with him to our demise and his retirement.

 

* Gibbons - playing a big role now on a winning club. Took a shot to the head last night. The play still resulted in the winning goal.

 

* Yandle - awful use of a talented player. AV only figured out how to use Yandle at the very end of his run here.

 

* Staal - just blew here. Yet, is killing it in Minny again this year.

 

* Shatty - starting to lose his offensive mojo at this age?

 

* Buch - best metrics per minute, yet sits in playoffs. Gets the bench or 4th line minutes way too often. AV is disappointed in his D, but only seems to teach by playing time. i'd like to see a focus where he brings attention to a skill he is working on with the player or something they identified on tape and are addressing in practice.

 

* Vesey - similar story. he is not progressing fast enough because he is not getting enough minutes with legit top 9 talent, until injuries. The kid is working hard and is serious.

 

* Nieves - another situation where we see potential, yet no growth under AV. Just regression. Why are they not successful in improving his D? It needs to be better given his role.

 

There's more. Individually, one can excuse any of these. But as a whole, it's an indictment. AV expects players to be close to finished products if they are to play here. The best examples are Fast and Lindberg. Their development can be credited to Sweeden and the AHL. They both arrived finished products and it showed in their first weeks.

 

AV is also slow to identify and take advantage of players strengths and weakness. You might cite Skjei as an exception, except he was too slow to recognize Skjei should get more minutes, sooner. I'll give him credit for recognizing Fast, but Lindberg was grossly underutilized in the playoffs.

 

Certainly, AV teaches a style and gameplan pretty well, but he is not noted as a skill developer. He does not coach players up. That is the crux of my case and this exercise seems to support it.

 

My bottom line: If it is time to sell UFAs for picks, it is time to fire AV. At the very latest, at season's end.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well said. Nice job. Couldn't agree more on the sheer fact he's not a developmental coach at all. He's the exact opposite. A finisher. The guy you bring in to take your veteran group deep. Even though he's never won.

 

I wonder if Sheldon Keefe is on the Rangers radar?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is honestly, honestly, one of the biggest pieces of horseshit I've ever read on here.

 

Del zotta was already on a huge slide. and didnt do much, since, under several other coaches

jon more - AV actually gave him a chance, after Torts wouldnt

 

actually, I'm not even going to bother. You are talking about guys entering retirement, or young guys that havent done shit since they left. AV ruined Dominic Moore, St Louis, Stempniak,,, wtf dude... are you serious with this shit?

 

Go back through and look at all the guys Renney (Jagr, Straka, Weekes, Nylander, Sykora, Lundmark, Ozolinsh, Tyutin, Marcel Hossa, Prucha, Ortmeyer, Hollweg, Dominic Moore, Adam Hall, Rachunek, Pock, Dawes, Cullen, Baranka, Byers,

 

Torts ruined Gomez, drury, Chris Johnson, Zherdev, Lisin, that mopey motherfucker on the bench, Avery, Shanahan, Korpikoski, Antropov, Frolov, Wolski, Naslund, Sjostrom, Anisimov, Dubinsky, Sauer, Redden, Kalinin, Morris, Gilroy, Olli Jokinen, Prust, Paranteau, JAM, Bobby S, Boyle, Higgins, Matt Zaba didnt progress AT ALL!!, Prospal, Christensen, Gaborik Clowe, Grachev, Weise, Dupont, Zuccarello, McCabe, Williams, Erixon, Deveaux, Hagelin...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Zibenajad, McDonagh, Kreider, Zuccarello, Nash, Miller, Holden, Raanta, Stepan, Brassard, Fast, Hayes, Klein, Grabner, Lindberg, Skjei, Clendening, etc played some of their best hockey for AV

 

This is a mix or randomly aged players. Mostly veterans. How does this disprove the theory that AV doesn't develop young players well?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a mix or randomly aged players. Mostly veterans. How does this disprove the theory that AV doesn't develop young players well?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

Nonetheless, its still of list of players who did develop, to some extent, under AV. So clearly, "AV cant develop talent" is inaccurate.

 

 

The OPs list clearly doesnt focus on young players.

 

It's not a coached job to develop young players. You can either play in the NHL, or come back when you can. This isnt a development league.

 

Dont list old dudes and say "see, he cant develop this 40 year old". (wtf...)

and I listed a ton of young guys that didnt develop, and I didnt even look at draft picks.

 

I've complained for years that Hartford is terrible at developing NHL ready talent. (Thats a term for a reason)

 

He just lists a bunch of guys that didnt play up to his potential, then blames the coach. It's complete bullshit and ignores... everything.

 

Look at any coach, youll see a shit load of guys that didnt live up to potential.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well said. Nice job. Couldn't agree more on the sheer fact he's not a developmental coach at all. He's the exact opposite. A finisher. The guy you bring in to take your veteran group deep. Even though he's never won.

 

I wonder if Sheldon Keefe is on the Rangers radar?

 

Thanks Phil, appreciate it.

 

Very interesting and unique suggestion on Keefe. Wonder if mgmt would be OK glossing over his past, prior to the Marlies. Toronto mgmt seems to think he is one of the brightest minds in the game. i can easily overlook it because he has changed so much and admitted the mistakes and really articulates his evolution well.

 

He is very intriguing because he has a very flexible and fresh outlook on today's game. Very open-minded and he thinks a lot about how players develop best for type of hockey we see today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are a lot of stubborn coaches. Coaches with big time egos. And while some may look directly at Torts and say, yup that fits him pretty well, it's also true of AV. Even though he's a media darling, he's actually as stubborn as anyone the Rangers have had in my lifetime. The complete refusal to use players to their strengths baffles me.

 

Kevin Shattenkirk is a good example of this. He wasn't brought in here to play defense. We all all know that. Yes, that's his position on the opening faceoff but Shattenkirk scores goals, runs the PP, and puts up points. That's it. The hope is that his offensive ability outweighs his defensive woes, and at the beginning of the year they did. Our PP looked fucking GOOD for the first time in years. KS was skating the puck with confidence through the neutral zone. It was like we had a mobile dman for once....

 

A few months later, after AV declared KS "a work in progress" in November, the PP stinks, KS is no longer skating the puck, and the offensive side of his game is all but dead.

 

Like Phil said, AV is a closer - so to speak, even though he's never actually closed. He takes teams with veteran talent and pushes them for a season or two. After that, when the vets are now older, he just flat out doesn't adjust. He allows the locker room to run itself, even when there aren't any veteran players in it. He's hands-off by all accounts, seemingly benching players to get some kind of message across, rather than teaching. Why Buch continues to get press box and 4th line minutes (seemingly at random) is odd to me. Vesey on the 4th line: odd to me. Refusal to use Skjei on anything other than the 3rd pairing last post season: odd.

 

This summer I listened to an interview with Vesey who voluntarily brought up this idea that there's a feeling around the NHL that AV doesn't like young guys... Vesey was quick to back down from that, but the fact that this idea exists means there's some truth to it. If the Rangers sell (which I believe they should) AV should go as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is honestly, honestly, one of the biggest pieces of horseshit I've ever read on here.

 

Honestly Josh, I completely misjudged you. I never expected such a downright rude, incoherent and embarrassingly hollow off-the-mark critique by you. Completely boorish and neanderthal. One would think, you would be able to disagree civilly, especially since you think what you have to offer is so interesting and indisputable. Your response would be over-the-top insulting, except it is apparent you did not comprehend the most basic ideas. I'm guessing I hit some sort of sore spot for you to stoop to such a pathetic attack. Damned if I can explain such obtuse replies and disrespectful replies from you.

 

Basically, I wanted to share my own original ideas/thoughts/theory on why so many young Rangers and newly acquired guys seem to not grow to their potential under AV. That AV is not a developmental coach or teacher to individuals, on things like skills. Therefore I conclude, if mgmt trades UFAs and vets for prospects and picks, then AV should go to. Let me stop there. Do you disagree with that premise? Forget my examples, what do you think, without all the rancor?

 

I then stated there would be legitimate reasons to release AV, but to me the biggest reason is AV is not built to coach players up. He is not the coach to help youth hone their craft and skills. Do you hate this thought?

 

Del zotta was already on a huge slide. and didnt do much, since, under several other coaches

jon more - AV actually gave him a chance, after Torts wouldnt

 

actually, I'm not even going to bother. You are talking about guys entering retirement, or young guys that havent done shit since they left. AV ruined Dominic Moore, St Louis, Stempniak,,, wtf dude... are you serious with this shit?

 

WTF right back at ya. You sound like a know-it-all jerk. I was looking forward to disagreement, "but why bother" is right.

 

And yeah MDZ may have had prior issues (I was not a fan), yet AV did not help improve his game, it got worse. That is a fact. I was shocked we were able to get someone like Klein for him. And you think AV gave Jon Moore the chance he needed, given his skating, age and skill set? Torts barely had him and we are talking about AV. AV had his ass so deep on the bench or in the press box it was a crime. He just needed a little more time and ice time to really start paying dividends. Av blew it, along with mgmt. Jon Moore has become a solid top 4 Dman (or better) on a winning team.

 

So yeah... please don't bother. We can't even get into the nuanced idea of AV adjusting to "new" vets exploiting their strengths and minimizing their weaknesses. You must've thought Stempniak sucked before he got here and sucked when he left here? If that is your read, you are just plain wrong. He only sucked here. Look it up. Look at Staal's production after he left here. Sure, it might have nothing to do with AV. Maybe Staal was such a workout demon in the off season that his time here was an aberration. I actually believe that is possible. Yet, there is still no disputing that Staal did not play well under AV. And maybe St Louis hit his retirement wall at the exact time he was traded here, because he sure was smoking in Tampa a month before arriving here.

 

Just thought the whole thing was interesting. You do not, but spare me your insults.

 

Go back through and look at all the guys Renney (Jagr, Straka, Weekes, Nylander, Sykora, Lundmark, Ozolinsh, Tyutin, Marcel Hossa, Prucha, Ortmeyer, Hollweg, Dominic Moore, Adam Hall, Rachunek, Pock, Dawes, Cullen, Baranka, Byers,

 

Torts ruined Gomez, drury, Chris Johnson, Zherdev, Lisin, that mopey motherfucker on the bench, Avery, Shanahan, Korpikoski, Antropov, Frolov, Wolski, Naslund, Sjostrom, Anisimov, Dubinsky, Sauer, Redden, Kalinin, Morris, Gilroy, Olli Jokinen, Prust, Paranteau, JAM, Bobby S, Boyle, Higgins, Matt Zaba didnt progress AT ALL!!, Prospal, Christensen, Gaborik Clowe, Grachev, Weise, Dupont, Zuccarello, McCabe, Williams, Erixon, Deveaux, Hagelin...

 

Renney? Renney what? There is not even a thought or sentence there. Torts? Torts ruined? And a bunch of names that make no sense?

 

I did not say anything about AV ruining anyone, nor Torts ruining anyone. Renney? Do we even care? Is this relevant Josh? Talk about missing the point. I'm sorry to any readers who are now bored or confused as shit over this nonsense.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nonetheless, its still of list of players who did develop, to some extent, under AV. So clearly, "AV cant develop talent" is inaccurate.

 

Phil doesn't get how your disjointed list lacking any explanation disproves anything. Why don't you take a step back and not be so certain that you even get any finer points.

 

Second, I never said "AV can't develop talent". I'm saying young talent hasn't developed as far or fast as I would have hoped under AV. Not saying he can't, maybe he just thinks like you... this isn't a dev league, not his job. Maybe he is less patient with youth or mistakes. Maybe he teaches some, but never talks about that aspect of his job. Maybe he would rather trust vets. Maybe he is slow to recognize/scout talent. I could be a good conversation, but certainly not with you.

 

Regardless, coaching up youth is not his noted forte (or at least not much evidence of it) and we have few sparkling success stories to point to. I did mention Fast as one guy he recognized right away and Skjei as one guy he hasn't jerked around much. Are you really arguing that AV would be a good choice for us if the team has a lot more rookies and ELCs?

 

The OPs list clearly doesnt focus on young players.

 

Jon Moore, MDZ, Duclair, Gibbons, Buch, Vesey, Nieves, JT Miller, Kreids were not young players when AV took over? Most are still pretty young. Is Buch playing as well as you'd expect? Vesey? Nieves? Miller? Have Kreider and Miller's playoff performances improved. Are Gibbons and Moore not excelling in Jersey, but could not even see the ice here? Just a thought. Just what i'm seeing over the longer haul.

 

It's not a coached job to develop young players. You can either play in the NHL, or come back when you can. This isnt a development league.

 

Fair enough. i think the league is changing and getting younger. Coached will be forced to do some more teaching and development. Yep, I get that the kids are in better shape and more prepared, but they still lack pro seasoning and experience.

 

Dont list old dudes and say "see, he cant develop this 40 year old". (wtf...)

 

I should have made a 2nd list for newly acquired players. I did not come close to saying he can't develop 40 year olds. Nice red herring.

 

My point was there seemed to be a common thread. I wondered why they too, did not contribute as expected. I mixed a few ideas together for a bigger theme. I assumed wrongly that you'd get the jist, tie-in and differentiation. Maybe AV is slow to figure out talent or how talent mixes best? I'm curious, you are not.

 

and I listed a ton of young guys that didnt develop, and I didnt even look at draft picks.

Can't make any sense of this, or why you did this, or how it is relevant.

 

I've complained for years that Hartford is terrible at developing NHL ready talent. (Thats a term for a reason)

 

He just lists a bunch of guys that didnt play up to his potential, then blames the coach. It's complete bullshit and ignores... everything.

 

Look at any coach, youll see a shit load of guys that didnt live up to potential.

 

Cripes Josh, you are off the rails. Your mention of Hartford is meaningless. When it comes to the youth, the unfinished product that is wearing a NY Ranger uniform was the focus. It is those guys who have a chance for the most growth. Yet, we all keep wondering why those who arrive with a few things to work on don't make the leap. I'm not wondering about the guys who were developed properly/traditionally like Fast, Lindberg and Skjei, which AV has nothing to do with. Nor was I thinking about Hags, Cally, McD or other finished products that were already here.

 

Improving Hartford is important, but does nothing for college kids like Kreids or Vesey or KHL Buch. Those guys have to further develop in NY, not much choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are a lot of stubborn coaches. Coaches with big time egos. And while some may look directly at Torts and say, yup that fits him pretty well, it's also true of AV. Even though he's a media darling, he's actually as stubborn as anyone the Rangers have had in my lifetime. The complete refusal to use players to their strengths baffles me.

 

Kevin Shattenkirk is a good example of this. He wasn't brought in here to play defense. We all all know that. Yes, that's his position on the opening faceoff but Shattenkirk scores goals, runs the PP, and puts up points. That's it. The hope is that his offensive ability outweighs his defensive woes, and at the beginning of the year they did. Our PP looked fucking GOOD for the first time in years. KS was skating the puck with confidence through the neutral zone. It was like we had a mobile dman for once....

 

A few months later, after AV declared KS "a work in progress" in November, the PP stinks, KS is no longer skating the puck, and the offensive side of his game is all but dead.

 

Like Phil said, AV is a closer - so to speak, even though he's never actually closed. He takes teams with veteran talent and pushes them for a season or two. After that, when the vets are now older, he just flat out doesn't adjust. He allows the locker room to run itself, even when there aren't any veteran players in it. He's hands-off by all accounts, seemingly benching players to get some kind of message across, rather than teaching. Why Buch continues to get press box and 4th line minutes (seemingly at random) is odd to me. Vesey on the 4th line: odd to me. Refusal to use Skjei on anything other than the 3rd pairing last post season: odd.

 

This summer I listened to an interview with Vesey who voluntarily brought up this idea that there's a feeling around the NHL that AV doesn't like young guys... Vesey was quick to back down from that, but the fact that this idea exists means there's some truth to it. If the Rangers sell (which I believe they should) AV should go as well.

 

As usual 31, you are critical of AV, in a thoughtful and coherent post.

 

I was also puzzled by all the examples you mention and then some. Like keeping a hot Lindberg and a getting hot Buch in the press box, during the playoffs. His use of Yandle was malpractice. His patience and overuse of St Louis, who was falling apart, was maddening. How about G, Staal and a struggling Holden the 2nd half last year and playoffs. At least G was OK in the playoffs. And the older guys didn't get the occasional maintenance days so they could be fresh/healthy for the playoffs.

 

Guys like Buch and Vesey are not put in an advantageous position to succeed. Even when AV knows they need to play a big role if the team is going to contend. He never seems like he is trying to accelerate a young man's development. Maybe he is just so risk adverse that AV does not want to pay any dues investing ice time on inexperience, when he can just double shift a trusted vet.

 

This may not be unusual for coaches. However, it is now a big consideration if we anticipate mgmt moving towards trading multiple vets for more youth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly Josh, I completely misjudged you. I never expected such a downright rude, incoherent and embarrassingly hollow off-the-mark critique by you. Completely boorish and neanderthal. One would think, you would be able to disagree civilly, especially since you think what you have to offer is so interesting and indisputable. Your response would be over-the-top insulting, except it is apparent you did not comprehend the most basic ideas. I'm guessing I hit some sort of sore spot for you to stoop to such a pathetic attack. Damned if I can explain such obtuse replies and disrespectful replies from you.

 

Basically, I wanted to share my own original ideas/thoughts/theory on why so many young Rangers and newly acquired guys seem to not grow to their potential under AV. That AV is not a developmental coach or teacher to individuals, on things like skills. Therefore I conclude, if mgmt trades UFAs and vets for prospects and picks, then AV should go to. Let me stop there. Do you disagree with that premise? Forget my examples, what do you think, without all the rancor?

 

I then stated there would be legitimate reasons to release AV, but to me the biggest reason is AV is not built to coach players up. He is not the coach to help youth hone their craft and skills. Do you hate this thought?

 

 

 

WTF right back at ya. You sound like a know-it-all jerk. I was looking forward to disagreement, "but why bother" is right.

 

And yeah MDZ may have had prior issues (I was not a fan), yet AV did not help improve his game, it got worse. That is a fact. I was shocked we were able to get someone like Klein for him. And you think AV gave Jon Moore the chance he needed, given his skating, age and skill set? Torts barely had him and we are talking about AV. AV had his ass so deep on the bench or in the press box it was a crime. He just needed a little more time and ice time to really start paying dividends. Av blew it, along with mgmt. Jon Moore has become a solid top 4 Dman (or better) on a winning team.

 

So yeah... please don't bother. We can't even get into the nuanced idea of AV adjusting to "new" vets exploiting their strengths and minimizing their weaknesses. You must've thought Stempniak sucked before he got here and sucked when he left here? If that is your read, you are just plain wrong. He only sucked here. Look it up. Look at Staal's production after he left here. Sure, it might have nothing to do with AV. Maybe Staal was such a workout demon in the off season that his time here was an aberration. I actually believe that is possible. Yet, there is still no disputing that Staal did not play well under AV. And maybe St Louis hit his retirement wall at the exact time he was traded here, because he sure was smoking in Tampa a month before arriving here.

 

Just thought the whole thing was interesting. You do not, but spare me your insults.

 

 

 

Renney? Renney what? There is not even a thought or sentence there. Torts? Torts ruined? And a bunch of names that make no sense?

 

I did not say anything about AV ruining anyone, nor Torts ruining anyone. Renney? Do we even care? Is this relevant Josh? Talk about missing the point. I'm sorry to any readers who are now bored or confused as shit over this nonsense.

 

Now that first paragraph we can all agree upon. Never a truer word spoken on here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Phil doesn't get how your disjointed list lacking any explanation disproves anything. Why don't you take a step back and not be so certain that you even get any finer points.

 

Second, I never said "AV can't develop talent". I'm saying young talent hasn't developed as far or fast as I would have hoped under AV. Not saying he can't, maybe he just thinks like you... this isn't a dev league, not his job. Maybe he is less patient with youth or mistakes. Maybe he teaches some, but never talks about that aspect of his job. Maybe he would rather trust vets. Maybe he is slow to recognize/scout talent. I could be a good conversation, but certainly not with you.

 

Regardless, coaching up youth is not his noted forte (or at least not much evidence of it) and we have few sparkling success stories to point to. I did mention Fast as one guy he recognized right away and Skjei as one guy he hasn't jerked around much. Are you really arguing that AV would be a good choice for us if the team has a lot more rookies and ELCs?

 

 

 

Jon Moore, MDZ, Duclair, Gibbons, Buch, Vesey, Nieves, JT Miller, Kreids were not young players when AV took over? Most are still pretty young. Is Buch playing as well as you'd expect? Vesey? Nieves? Miller? Have Kreider and Miller's playoff performances improved. Are Gibbons and Moore not excelling in Jersey, but could not even see the ice here? Just a thought. Just what i'm seeing over the longer haul.

 

 

 

Fair enough. i think the league is changing and getting younger. Coached will be forced to do some more teaching and development. Yep, I get that the kids are in better shape and more prepared, but they still lack pro seasoning and experience.

 

 

 

I should have made a 2nd list for newly acquired players. I did not come close to saying he can't develop 40 year olds. Nice red herring.

 

My point was there seemed to be a common thread. I wondered why they too, did not contribute as expected. I mixed a few ideas together for a bigger theme. I assumed wrongly that you'd get the jist, tie-in and differentiation. Maybe AV is slow to figure out talent or how talent mixes best? I'm curious, you are not.

 

 

Can't make any sense of this, or why you did this, or how it is relevant.

 

 

 

Cripes Josh, you are off the rails. Your mention of Hartford is meaningless. When it comes to the youth, the unfinished product that is wearing a NY Ranger uniform was the focus. It is those guys who have a chance for the most growth. Yet, we all keep wondering why those who arrive with a few things to work on don't make the leap. I'm not wondering about the guys who were developed properly/traditionally like Fast, Lindberg and Skjei, which AV has nothing to do with. Nor was I thinking about Hags, Cally, McD or other finished products that were already here.

 

Improving Hartford is important, but does nothing for college kids like Kreids or Vesey or KHL Buch. Those guys have to further develop in NY, not much choice.

 

Torts and AV were not brought in here to develop players, they were brought here to win.

You say that in the OP... then go on a rant about how he's not a development coach.

 

Most of the players you listed have the same stigma when they entered the league/draft. AVs not a horse whisperer. And anytime he gets close to trying to develop a player, the whole fucking world goes crazy. (any benching, sitting, moving down the lineup)

 

My bottom line: If it is time to sell UFAs for picks, it is time to fire AV. At the very latest, at season's end.

And I completely agree! I've said it before.

 

 

Maybe the post should be titled, "A Different Angle moving forward", instead of taking shots at AV in hopes that the pitchforkers come in to give you a thumbs up.

 

 

 

I think your post went off on a tangent, and my response didnt help (stay on topic). But again, this will happen with every coach. Not every player will be a success.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Josh on all points, AV was never brought here to develop, he was brought here to bring the team to the next step. The OP, although lengthy with good points, was delivered poorly in trying to make the actual point of moving forward without AV. I personally want AV gone, not because he doesn?t develop but because he almost never adjusts and I think the voice has gone stale.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Josh on all points, AV was never brought here to develop, he was brought here to bring the team to the next step. The OP, although lengthy with good points, was delivered poorly in trying to make the actual point of moving forward without AV. I personally want AV gone, not because he doesn’t develop but because he almost never adjusts and I think the voice has gone stale.

 

Yes sir, agree with this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think av has worn out his welcome almost on every level. There is no doubt that this team went from one of the better defensive structured teams to one that struggles constantly. In that situation it is hard to insulate young players learning the defensive part of the game because really the whole team is having problems. Av’s biggest flaw other than his systems structure is his inconsistent way of holding players accountable and poor lineup decisions.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think av has worn out his welcome almost on every level. There is no doubt that this team went from one of the better defensive structured teams to one that struggles constantly. In that situation it is hard to insulate young players learning the defensive part of the game because really the whole team is having problems. Av’s biggest flaw other than his systems structure is his inconsistent way of holding players accountable and poor lineup decisions.

 

I think that's the game evolving more than anything. The new influx of speed into the league the last 5+ seasons has seen a huge shift in defensemen and defensive systems. Before, you needed big burly stay at home defenders knocking you on your ass... now, you need someone who might keep up with Larkin one game, McDavid the next, and Mackinnon to follow.

 

We knew the defense was going to be weak, hence why they focused on forward depth. And honestly, both cater to AV's system.

 

I still maintain the belief that this is a very good team when they play his system, for 60 minutes - we saw this last game. But how often does that happen?

 

I think we all understand that something will happen, its just who, what and when.

 

Again, how is moving Buchnevich to the 4th line, after he has a horrible game - visually and statistically- not holding players accountable? Or benching Smith?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know how we can criticize how AV has failed to develop players and then use MSL, Yandle, Stralman, Dom Moore, Staal and Lee Stempniak as examples. MSL and Moore were old and declining regardless. Yandle and Staal just weren't system fits, and Stralman left after one season. Stempniak wasn't bad, but wasn't particularly noticeable on the ice. Let's not confuse development with system fit, because that's far more important for vets.

 

Duclair is the only young guy with any talent who has left, he's pretty useless, and AV hasn't had any early draft picks to develop. I think it's a bit unfair to grade a coach on how he develops players when he hasn't had any good picks. Jon Moore is a #3, not a number one, and who knows whether or not AV wanted to keep him around to develop. It's not like he was going to play in the top 4 here. Gibbons sucks, he just had a nice little run there - now has 1 goal in his last 20 games and played fewer than 10 minutes in their last 2.

 

On the flip side, development for Miller, Kreider, Hayes and Skjei has been good. That's all of the real talent he's had to mold, and, other than Miller, I don't think any of them have much more to give. Mac played his best hockey, by far, in the Cup run under AV. People complain about Buch, but young guys playing a couple of games on the 4th line is common. It's part of the growth process. He did the same with JT. If Buch is a 65-point first-line player next year AND plays a stronger two-way game (which is why he gets benched), it's hard to argue much with AV's handling of him.

 

AV's legacy, if you want to call it that, in terms of development, will be defined by Andersson, Chytil and, to some degree, Pionk, DeAngelo, Graves, and Lettieri. Those are the guys who came in under him and will have a chance to grow under him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share



×
×
  • Create New...