[brooks] Rangers Fire David Quinn, All Assistants; Keeping Benoit Allaire

[josh]

I don't think we need a coach that makes the team more than the sum of its parts. We have plenty of talent here, it's about a system. There's a bunch of individual parts who are all performing well, but they're not a team.. yet.

 

I agree. I mentioned the other day during a convo, they have the horses (mostly), they just need a guy that gets them to race and stop frolicking around like ponies.

 

Maybe that's a coach, maybe it's a player.

[BrooksBurner]

I don't disagree that Quinn has just as much head coaching success but you have to take into account their entire careers. Quinn wasn't an NHL player. Was an assistant for what, one year? Head coached in the AHL for one year? Rick Tocchet has been in the NHL in some form or another for 37 years.... I guess you can boil it down to "he hasn't had head coaching success" but that seems incredibly reductive. He's won the cup 3 times.

 

I just don't understand what fans want. People moaned that Julien, JT and Babcock were on the short list but then also complain that Tocchet doesn't have have a winning pedigree. It seems like you just want Gallant at this point, who hasn't won shit. Ever. At any point in his NHL career.

 

And that's fine if the only one you want is Gallant, but don't pretend it's because everyone else sucks.

 

Morph has covered my thoughts on Tocchet pretty well. I'm personally fine with all of the other coaches you've mentioned here. My preferred pick is still JT, but I realize that's a long shot. Gallant, Julien, Babcock are all great choices IMO

 

Tocchet's the guy without the necessary coaching resume needed here.

[Ozzy]

I don't think we need a coach that makes the team more than the sum of its parts. We have plenty of talent here, it's about a system. There's a bunch of individual parts who are all performing well, but they're not a team.. yet.

 

Kinda why I originally listed off a bunch of newer names. It was also why I suggested moving Drury behind the bench last season or so.

 

Even when I look around now, I keep coming back to old players, maybe Drury played with them. I just think a guy less than 40 years removed as a player is going to be able to help the kids more. I'm sure Drury remembers coming up as a kid and developing, and watching others do the same. Especially with the lack of leadership on the team, they need someone that's been in the trenches more recently and can relate to them. Not an old dude who has been saying the same thing for 50 years. It's like taking personal career advice from a guy that's been in congress for that long - he's too far removed from the life.

 

I agree. I mentioned the other day during a convo, they have the horses (mostly), they just need a guy that gets them to race and stop frolicking around like ponies.

 

Maybe that's a coach, maybe it's a player.

 

I like the thought process here, fellas.

 

I couldn't really put my finger on it as to why I liked Brind'amour for us, and also why I wasn't opposed to Tocchet. I like the idea of a guy who's more in tune with today's game, and the newer generation of players.

 

I sure as hell am curious to see who we get! I can see Drury making a good choice here. I have a really good feeling about where this franchise is headed.

[ThirtyONE]

I don't think we need a coach that makes the team more than the sum of its parts. We have plenty of talent here, it's about a system. There's a bunch of individual parts who are all performing well, but they're not a team.. yet.

 

This. "Greater than the sum of their parts" means they stink on paper. The Rangers are friggin loaded. They have norris and hart trophy candidates on the roster, yet they don't win games. The next coach has to be the bus driver that gets them all going the right direction. This isn't a Las Vegas or Phx situation so I don't know why people are looking at those two places as if what happened there will happen here. Both guys will have their own vision for what they can do with the Rangers. It'll be different from what they did in their previous stops.

[The Dude]

Obviously anything short of the bastard genetic mashup of Bowman, Brooks, Keenan, and Brindamour is unacceptable.

 

Our choices are two highly respected coaching candidates who have consistently done better than the team indicates they should. The biggest issues I have are...

 

1 - Gallant has had one big run and little more. Tocchet has had numerous deep runs as an assistant.

2 - Tocchet's never managed the level of young talent this team has. Gallant actually has (in Florida).

3 - Gallant has been unceremoniously fired with winning records twice now.

4 - It remains to be seen what either of these coaches does with actual superstar players. Zibanejad is the best center either of them have ever had (yes, Tocchet had 19 year old Stamkos and Gallant had 19 year old Barkov). Panarin is the best player either of them has ever had. Fox is the best defenseman either of them have ever had. Hell, Shesterkin is the best goalie either of them have ever had. We know what they do when they've got "sum of their parts" sort of teams, but that's not where we are.

 

The thing I'd probably keep harping on is that coaching is even more voodoo than goaltending. Aside from Trotz, who else is left with real coaching pedigree? Paul Maurice? Are we jumping up and down to get Peter DeBoer here? Cassidy is still on his first post-lockout full coaching job, Brindamour is on his first, Bednar is on his first, Ducharme is terrible but is on his first, Jon Cooper is on his first too.

 

There's no "been there" aspect. There's not really a rhyme or reason - it's right guy, right place, right time.

 

Yet Boudreau is constantly skipped over. Talk about been there. Besides Torts, he's the MOST successful of the available coaches and he's not even talked about.

 

The spook on Gallante is that he's been unceremoniously fired twice, with no obvious reasons given. There's gotta be something there that's never to be talked about.

 

With Tocchet, I don't think his rosters have even been THAT bad. Infact, I feel he should have been able to get way more out of a guy like Keller. Their rosters have had some impact players that he just couldn't squeeze much out of. So, fuck Tocchet.

 

Boudreau is the best candidate not named Tortorella.

 

Are the Rangers looking for a yes man as coach? Because it sure seems like it.

[The Dude]

I know. You said, "I'd be more interested to see if he made the team perform greater than the sum of its parts and he just didn't do that."

 

He did do that though. His first year they had 29 wins, took them then to 39 wins, then a bubble birth. This with the best player being 45 point Clayton Keller. How is that not having the team far out perform what you would expect the shitty roster to accomplish?

 

He's had Kessel, Keller, Hall, Dvorak, Schmaltz, Ekman Larson, Domi and a slew of decent goalies. It's not like yes had little to work with. I think a better coach would make Keller into a franchise forward.

 

I'm just not sold nor am I sure why he's even in the conversation. Cup winning players don't often make good coaches. Otherwise the 80s Oilers would be coaching half the teams and Brian Trottier wouldn't even had to write a nice letter to Glen Sather to get his first and last NHL coaching gig..

[Flynn]

If we are going to talk about Tocchet never doing much.. We can't ignore the fact that Bruce Boudreau had 4 straight Division winners in Washington and couldn't even get to the Conference Finals.. Won 4 straight Pacific titles while in Anaheim, and only got one of those teams to the Conference Finals. Got smoked out of the playoffs both times he took Minnesota to the playoffs.. Talk about a guy who hasn't done shit with some damn good rosters. I'm not seeing the Tocchet love either, but keep Boudreau outta here- He's a fatter, balder AV.

[josh]

#HireAV

[The Dude]

If we are going to talk about Tocchet never doing much.. We can't ignore the fact that Bruce Boudreau had 4 straight Division winners in Washington and couldn't even get to the Conference Finals.. Won 4 straight Pacific titles while in Anaheim, and only got one of those teams to the Conference Finals. Got smoked out of the playoffs both times he took Minnesota to the playoffs.. Talk about a guy who hasn't done shit with some damn good rosters. I'm not seeing the Tocchet love either, but keep Boudreau outta here- He's a fatter, balder AV.

 

Boudreau has 567 career wins as a coach.

Ranks 16th all time in points %. 22nd in all time wins.

 

Rick Tocchet has 438 career wins. Ranked 206 in point % and 89th in wins. .. These names aren't even in the same galaxy as far as success should be considered.

 

Boudreau started in 2007. Tocchet started in 08...

 

Dan Bylsma has won a Stanley Cup . Is he a better coach than anyone being discussed? How long did it take Keenan to get over the hump? Measuring a coach by the amount of rings they've won isn't a great metric to use. Otherwise you'd only be interested in hiring coaches who have won cups. How many coaches should be employed then, if that's all you can go by?

 

Boudreau is a successful coach.

[LindG1000]

Yet Boudreau is constantly skipped over. Talk about been there. Besides Torts, he's the MOST successful of the available coaches and he's not even talked about.

 

The spook on Gallante is that he's been unceremoniously fired twice, with no obvious reasons given. There's gotta be something there that's never to be talked about.

 

With Tocchet, I don't think his rosters have even been THAT bad. Infact, I feel he should have been able to get way more out of a guy like Keller. Their rosters have had some impact players that he just couldn't squeeze much out of. So, fuck Tocchet.

 

Boudreau is the best candidate not named Tortorella.

 

Are the Rangers looking for a yes man as coach? Because it sure seems like it.

 

I think Boudreau is skipped over because he's not at all connected to the job. Further, he actually hasn't really been there - sure he makes the playoffs, but he also loses every fucking time. Usually with good teams.

 

Tocchet's had a few good players and he's gotten good production from them. Keller's the one that worries me - but he's never had a roster that had more than a punchers chance at success. The list you've got in the post above - it's pretty mediocre. Sure, they could have rolled out Hall-Schmaltz-Kessel, but then they're going with like...Crouse-Dvorak-Garland or some shit. Meanwhile, they get Colorado and Vegas 6 times a year or whatever.

[jsm7302]

At the end of the day; Drury has A SHIT TON of faith put in him. In Chris we trust until proven otherwise. I like the cleaning of the cupboards he has done to usher in a whole new mantra not just for the players but for the organization. May it be Tocchet or Gallant; I'm excited to see a new brand of success.

[LindG1000]

No tweet, but in this week's Puck Soup, Wyshynski prognosticated based on what he's hearing...

 

Tocchet to the Rangers

Quinn to the Jackets

[siddious]

No tweet, but in this week's Puck Soup, Wyshynski prognosticated based on what he's hearing...

 

Tocchet to the Rangers

Quinn to the Jackets

 

I don't know what to think about this. Ill give the guy a chance but I wont pretend that I think Gallant is a better choice.

[Dunny]

Well, looks like he has all the bases covered then

[Morphinity 2.0]

No tweet, but in this week's Puck Soup, Wyshynski prognosticated based on what he's hearing...

 

Tocchet to the Rangers

Quinn to the Jackets

 

Originally he said Gallant to Rangers, Boudreau to Buffalo, random ass college coach to Coyotes, and Tocchet to Columbus.

 

I think his original makes more sense.

[Sharpshooter]

Originally he said Gallant to Rangers, Boudreau to Buffalo, random ass college coach to Coyotes, and Tocchet to Columbus.

 

I think his original makes more sense.

 

Yes, I like his original predictions much better. lol I'm not totally anti-Tocchet, but I just don't have a great feeling about him here for some reason.

[ThirtyONE]

#HireAV

 

You should be banned. lol