Gravesy Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 In what way have these guys developed? Hayes and Zib are the same players they were after the deadline last year, and Staal and Lunqvist are the same as they've been for basically a decade. This system does help Staal a bit, I guess. But there has been 0 development from youngsters, and that's the one thing that Quinn absolutely has to do. Maybe I'm missing your point here, but: Zib: .82 ppg/on pace for 68 points Hayes: .84 ppg/on pace for 69 points Kreider: .75 ppg/on pace for 62 points This is vastly superior to anything they've done before, so I'm not entirely sure how you can argue they're "the same players". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Future Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 Maybe I'm missing your point here, but: Zib: .82 ppg/on pace for 68 points Hayes: .84 ppg/on pace for 69 points Kreider: .75 ppg/on pace for 62 points This is vastly superior to anything they've done before, so I'm not entirely sure how you can argue they're "the same players". Post-deadline Zib: .89 Hayes: .79 Kreider: .79 So like I said, they're the same players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 Post-deadline Zib: .89 Hayes: .79 Kreider: .79 So like I said, they're the same players. Sure, if you're not taking into account strength of schedule, the fact that post deadline hockey for a lot of teams is very different than pre-Thanksgiving hockey, etc. The situations just aren't apples to apples. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gravesy Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 Right. That's not the biggest sample size and quite situational, but fair enough. I'd imagine it'll be tough to argue they're the same players if they end up having career years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Future Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 Right. That's not the biggest sample size and quite situational, but fair enough. I'd imagine it'll be tough to argue they're the same players if they end up having career years. No it won't lol. Zib is the same player as last year but healthy, the difference with Hayes is that he's not being used as a checking C, and Kreider has a career-high SH%. That's the differences. None of them are better than they were last year after the deadline, when put in the same roles they are in now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 The entire offensive system is different...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Future Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 The entire offensive system is different...? So? Also, what is different? They are still the same one and done team they were under AV. Quinn tells them to shoot more, but they....don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gravesy Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 No it won't lol. Zib is the same player as last year but healthy, the difference with Hayes is that he's not being used as a checking C, and Kreider has a career-high SH%. That's the differences. None of them are better than they were last year after the deadline, when put in the same roles they are in now. None of them are any better than before but they're all having their best years ever. Ok. Look, I'm not saying the Rangers have the new Scotty Bowman behind the bench here, but it seems a bit strange to flatly refuse him any sort of credit for 3 guys having career years. And having to lean on "post deadline" stats which is highly situational and a small sample size doesn't help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rizz GAWD Lav No Cap FrFr Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 So? Also, what is different? They are still the same one and done team they were under AV. Quinn tells them to shoot more, but they....don't. Can?t even begin to understand the point here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CBrowningPI Posted January 8, 2019 Author Share Posted January 8, 2019 I have been impressed with Zibs physical play. From what I remember he very rarely finished his checks. Quinn asked the team to play with more toughness and Zib really stepped up. Even Hayes has thrown some checks this season in comparison to his previous seasons under AV. Sent from my SM-N900T using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Future Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 None of them are any better than before but they're all having their best years ever. Ok. Look, I'm not saying the Rangers have the new Scotty Bowman behind the bench here, but it seems a bit strange to flatly refuse him any sort of credit for 3 guys having career years. And having to lean on "post deadline" stats which is highly situational and a small sample size doesn't help. Development and opportunity are not the same. Using this season is a small sample size too... Kreider paced 52 points last year and is pacing 62 this year. His shooting % is up 5.8% and he's on pace for 228 shots. That alone represents is a 13-point improvement from last season's pace. Does Quinn get credit for Kreider's increased SH%? Shot totals are increased by less than .5 shots per game. Zib isn't better than the end of last season (.89), the beginning of last season before Kreider got hurt (.79), or the beginning of 16-17 before he got hurt (.79). The only difference in Hayes is that he's used in an offensive role. The only other time he's been used that way was the end of last season, when his numbers were the same. We're pointing to stat differences that can be attributed to puck bounces going one way or another and trying to say that a coach is developing players who have already been in the league 5 years? No thanks. Quinn will be measured by Andersson, Chytil, this year's class, etc., not the guys who were here before him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Future Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 Can’t even begin to understand the point here. System and player development aren't related, system is about opportunity. What is actually different about Quinn's offensive system than AV's that would lead to increased production? He wants more defense engaged, and more pucks to the net, but it doesn't happen. So what is actually different right now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
josh Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 None of them are any better than before but they're all having their best years ever. Ok. Look, I'm not saying the Rangers have the new Scotty Bowman behind the bench here, but it seems a bit strange to flatly refuse him any sort of credit for 3 guys having career years. And having to lean on "post deadline" stats which is highly situational and a small sample size doesn't help. The 2 or 3 guys performing well this season are in their "prime" years, and you'd expect them to progress, naturally, at this age. None of Zibanejad, Kreider or Hayes are "breaking out". They're doing what theyve always done. As Pete says, wait until January when PLAYER takes the month off, and the numbers fall back to normal. To me, there's been nothing noteworthy thus far, other than Quinn's talk. Renney - "Holy shit, they're competing and winning more than expected" Torts - "Holy shit, these guys actually care" AV - "Holy shit, some of these guys can play hockey" Quinn - "Holy shit, he looks like Mike Sullivan" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 So? Also, what is different? They are still the same one and done team they were under AV. Quinn tells them to shoot more, but they....don't.So of the system is different the coach gets credit. Having an offensive system that doesn't strictly rely on a counter punch chance off the rush is a pretty significant change. How many times the puck goes in is irrelevant with guys like Names and Fast in the top 6. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gravesy Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 The 2 or 3 guys performing well this season are in their "prime" years, and you'd expect them to progress, naturally, at this age. None of Zibanejad, Kreider or Hayes are "breaking out". They're doing what theyve always done. As Pete says, wait until January when PLAYER takes the month off, and the numbers fall back to normal. To me, there's been nothing noteworthy thus far, other than Quinn's talk. Renney - "Holy shit, they're competing and winning more than expected" Torts - "Holy shit, these guys actually care" AV - "Holy shit, some of these guys can play hockey" Quinn - "Holy shit, he looks like Mike Sullivan" Well let's just agree to disagree on this. Like I said, he doesn't get all the credit. He hasn't uncovered 3 diamonds in the rough. But in my book he gets some credit for 3 often maligned players all having career years coinciding with him walking through the door. Chalking it all up to natural progression doesn't seem that logical. IMO, of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
josh Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 If there is no such thing as natuaral progression, we need to give AV more credit for what he did with some guys Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gravesy Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 That’s not what I said. But you know that, of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albatrosss Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 Seems extraordinary that this natural progression coincided with Quinn walking through the door. As for Hayes, it surely can’t be a surprise that an already weak roster looks even worse without arguably their best player this season. I can’t see how that reflects negatively on the coach. it doesn't, that's why I said part of the success of this coach is Hayes. without him this team looks pretty much like they looked in the last few games, maybe not getting blown out every game but close. As I said, without Hayes this team is dead last, most likely. What would people grade him if the team had no Hayes and Lundqvist? probably lots of Ds and Cs, which isn't fair to Quinn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted January 9, 2019 Share Posted January 9, 2019 it doesn't, that's why I said part of the success of this coach is Hayes. without him this team looks pretty much like they looked in the last few games, maybe not getting blown out every game but close. As I said, without Hayes this team is dead last, most likely. What would people grade him if the team had no Hayes and Lundqvist? probably lots of Ds and Cs, which isn't fair to Quinn.And Quinn took Hayes out of the defensive role, he should get a bit of credit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 it doesn't, that's why I said part of the success of this coach is Hayes. without him this team looks pretty much like they looked in the last few games, maybe not getting blown out every game but close. As I said, without Hayes this team is dead last, most likely. What would people grade him if the team had no Hayes and Lundqvist? probably lots of Ds and Cs, which isn't fair to Quinn. He would get a pass on the grading, since he would've been coaching the worst team in the NHLs history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albatrosss Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 With Zucc on the team? Nah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slobberknocker Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 i think you guys are getting caught up in semantics. where quinn will ultimately be graded is how he develops the young pieces of the puzzle, many of which are not here yet. The unfairness of this is that he didn't choose the pieces, but that's the name of the game. For now as long as you see effort from the current group on the ice it should tell you that his point is getting across and guys are buying in. That's what he should be graded on in the present. We all know this roster as currently formed is limited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albatrosss Posted January 11, 2019 Share Posted January 11, 2019 Hence why i gave him a B-. I like what i see so far. I just dont like that the rookies arent doing much but not sure how much it is Quinn’s fault Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYR2711 Posted January 11, 2019 Share Posted January 11, 2019 My main issue with Quinn is that he doesn't change up the line combinations when they are clear as day stale. He sticks with the same line combos, guys need to be moved around. I also don't get what his fascination is with Namestnikov, he gives him so many chances and the guy isn't producing what he should be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozzy Posted January 11, 2019 Share Posted January 11, 2019 My main issue with Quinn is that he doesn't change up the line combinations when they are clear as day stale. He sticks with the same line combos, guys need to be moved around. I also don't get what his fascination is with Namestnikov, he gives him so many chances and the guy isn't producing what he should be. Doesn't matter who he combo's up...it's like 4 lines of 4th line players.... Showcasing of Namestnikov is fine by me...trade value increase = good! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.