GDT [RS] (#16) Rangers vs Montreal Canadiens — Bunch of Guys Eat Poutine

[Ozzy]

7 hours ago, Keirik said:

It’s funny. Seems like there are two camps on opposite ends for the same reasons. Camp one is saying “fuck it who cares, look where we are and look where we used to be in prior years.” Camp two is saying “ great I’m happy for where we are but look at how lucky we aren’t where we used to be.” 
 

    I can see both. I tend to think of it as we are very fortunate that our many mistakes haven’t led to losses. That’s totally a positive because we all know we can grow. Remember, this team has had spurts in the last two years at separate times where we unlocked success mid to late season . Under our new coach we have unlocked success day 1 basically. I see that as positive gains because we are growing. Shesty is saving us in quite a few games just as much as the opposition is not punishing us in quite a few games. However, we are going to grow on that. I have the utmost faith that our current coaching staff has the ability to see the problems and guide us through to further success.

 

LGR! 

 

6 hours ago, Pete said:

I guess it's all perspective, I don't believe success and results are the same thing. 

They have had positive results, but there are very few successes beyond individual performances.

20th in GF/GP, 21st in GA/GP, 30th in shots for, 7th worst in shots against.

There is no discernible difference between how they play now under Gallant versus how they played under Quinn. The main difference is personnel, which has nothing to do with coaching when the personnel are largely being deployed the same as they were last year and facing the same problems they faced last year. Can anyone sit there and say that this team is harder to play against because they have a new coach now? I'm not seeing "coaching" falling into the "improvements from last year" bucket.

They're a disorganized team that is feasting on other disorganized teams at the moment, and we all know that's kind of unsustainable over a full season and playoffs.

What I find funny is there was a Rangers under Torts team who basically went wire to wire as a president's trophy team, and a lot of people complained about that team when it was actually a good team, specifically because they weren't "fun to watch".

I just think it's a case of your mileage may vary... And how you measure success. If success for you means the team is fun to watch, that's a valid point, but we shouldn't say the team as good when they're at the bottom of the league in most statistical categories.

 

I think you guys are both right.  Both in the fact that they're winning, and seem to have a little better "team" theory in effect on the ice, which makes it fun, and also that statistically they are low in a lot of categories and some stellar goaltending has covered a lot of the messy play.

The positive I take from it is that they can really only improve.  And if that's the case, and they're winning games even while we're struggling statistically, I wonder what we'll look like when we start to climb in those stats.

Either way, I like the feel of this team a lot more than last season's.  I'm not quite sure we're ready to contend for a Cup just yet, but I feel like they're working and growing in the right direction.

[LONG LONG LONG TIME FAN]

Great victory sparked by Igor, KK,KK, #75  and the whole bunch. On a roll!!! BYE, Bye!!

Edited November 18, 2021 by LONG LONG LONG TIME FAN

[Keirik]

9 hours ago, Pete said:

I guess it's all perspective, I don't believe success and results are the same thing. 

They have had positive results, but there are very few successes beyond individual performances.

20th in GF/GP, 21st in GA/GP, 30th in shots for, 7th worst in shots against.

There is no discernible difference between how they play now under Gallant versus how they played under Quinn. The main difference is personnel, which has nothing to do with coaching when the personnel are largely being deployed the same as they were last year and facing the same problems they faced last year. Can anyone sit there and say that this team is harder to play against because they have a new coach now? I'm not seeing "coaching" falling into the "improvements from last year" bucket.

They're a disorganized team that is feasting on other disorganized teams at the moment, and we all know that's kind of unsustainable over a full season and playoffs.

What I find funny is there was a Rangers under Torts team who basically went wire to wire as a president's trophy team, and a lot of people complained about that team when it was actually a good team, specifically because they weren't "fun to watch".

I just think it's a case of your mileage may vary... And how you measure success. If success for you means the team is fun to watch, that's a valid point, but we shouldn't say the team as good when they're at the bottom of the league in most statistical categories.

 

The personnel angle is there for sure, but then again, a point can be made for how differently both Quinn and Gallant would use them. I think there are some glaring issues for sure, but there also just a different fight to this team even from the returning guys and a better feel for who’s rolling on what day and who isn’t.