Who Will Be the Next Coach?

[BrooksBurner]

57 minutes ago, Pete said:

I know you desperately want this to be true because it falls in line with your narrative, but then it wouldn't really explain Craig Berube taking over a last place team in January and leading them to a cup. 

 

Vegas missed the playoffs last year, lost their starting goalie as well as their captain and arguably best player for half the season, but gained a Bruce Cassidy who brought defensive structure (oh hey, look how that works!) Which has Adin Hill looking like a world beater. Eichel, Petro, and Theodore also missed big chunks of time. 

 

But you're right, it doesn't have anything to do with coaching. 

 

NHL teams are paying these guys millions to yell change it up!

 

 

 

Craig Berube doesn't prove anything. Coaches don't get supposed "Cup winning systems" implemented in the span of three months. You think he changed the system when he took over and they ran it all the way to the Cup? How did that work out in follow up seasons? Where are they at now with Berube and his system in place? Oh, right. A big fat zero in 4 seasons since, and now attempting some sort of rebuild on the fly. What happened in St. Louis was a shot of adrenaline because a new face was there that the players decided to turn it up for temporarily, mixed with a tremendous amount of luck. They are probably the only Cup winning team in history to go on a hot streak like they did, but a hot streak is all it was or they would have followed it up with something other than 1st round exits and a rebuild. Coaches don't go on hot streaks. Players do, with the help of a healthy portion of luck.

 

You say Bruce Cassidy, who apparently couldn't do enough with a Boston roster that just set the NHL record in points this year. Do you think it's Cassidy's fault that Boston failed year after year with that roster? Do you think it's Montgomery's fault Boston lost in round 1 this year? Nah. Its. The. Players. By the way, Vegas made a monumental trade that completely changed the roster. They went out and traded some big pieces for Jack Eichel. They had some good two way, forechecking players in the top 6, but were missing some of that elite talent at the top. They traded from their strength, Alex Tuch+++, to fix that roster problem. The Rangers have the opposite problem, an overabundance of perimeter skill at the top mixed with lack of two way forechecking guys, and to be fair to Drury he has tried to address it with swapping out support players to get by and see if it's enough. It was worth a shot, but it's clearly not enough.

 

Adin Hill is on a hot streak, as is Bobrovsky.

 

NHL teams are paying coaches the equivalent of 5% of the cap to be 5% of the difference. Yes, I know they don't count against the cap, but the point is if they made that much a difference, they would make a lot more to protect team investments that are approaching $100M annually.

Edited June 9, 2023 by BrooksBurner

[Pete]

31 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

 

Craig Berube doesn't prove anything. Coaches don't get supposed "Cup winning systems" implemented in the span of three months. You think he changed the system when he took over and they ran it all the way to the Cup? How did that work out in follow up seasons? Where are they at now with Berube and his system in place? Oh, right. A big fat zero in 4 seasons since, and now attempting some sort of rebuild on the fly. What happened in St. Louis was a shot of adrenaline because a new face was there that the players decided to turn it up for temporarily, mixed with a tremendous amount of luck. They are probably the only Cup winning team in history to go on a hot streak like they did, but a hot streak is all it was or they would have followed it up with something other than 1st round exits and a rebuild. Coaches don't go on hot streaks. Players do, with the help of a healthy portion of luck.

 

You say Bruce Cassidy, who apparently couldn't do enough with a Boston roster that just set the NHL record in points this year. Do you think it's Cassidy's fault that Boston failed year after year with that roster? Do you think it's Montgomery's fault Boston lost in round 1 this year? Nah. Its. The. Players. By the way, Vegas made a monumental trade that completely changed the roster. They went out and traded some big pieces for Jack Eichel. They had some good two way, forechecking players in the top 6, but were missing some of that elite talent at the top. They traded from their strength, Alex Tuch+++, to fix that roster problem. The Rangers have the opposite problem, an overabundance of perimeter skill at the top mixed with lack of two way forechecking guys, and to be fair to Drury he has tried to address it with swapping out support players to get by and see if it's enough. It was worth a shot, but it's clearly not enough.

 

Adin Hill is on a hot streak, as is Bobrovsky.

 

NHL teams are paying coaches the equivalent of 5% of the cap to be 5% of the difference. Yes, I know they don't count against the cap, but the point is if they made that much a difference, they would make a lot more to protect team investments that are approaching $100M annually.

Berube doesn't mean anything because it blows up your argument. Vegas missed the playoffs last year, with Eichel. This year they are running roughshod over the Panthers with a career backup in net. 

 

The rest of your argument is just avoidance of my original post. They didn't change much from end of last year, had key players miss time, still were successful. But it couldn't be because "net man up" knew the system and how to play it. Of course not.

Edited June 9, 2023 by Pete

[4EverRangerFrank]

We're getting past the 'normal delivery' timeframe here and are entering C-section hour!

 

I thought that a major announcement like a coaching change wasn't allowed until the Cup is won.

[BrooksBurner]

1 minute ago, Pete said:

Berube doesn't mean anything because it blows up your argument. Vegas missed the playoffs last year, with Eichel. This year they are running roughshod over the Panthers with a career backup in net. 

 

The rest of your argument is vapor.

 

I blew up your Berube angle. Eichel played 34 games last year coming back from his back surgery. Vegas seemed to be ok taking a step back last year in order to take two steps forward later. Hey, that sounds familiar:

 

https://www.blueshirtsbrotherhood.com/topic/24294-2022-23-off-season-thread-endless-pain-hatred-and-rage/?do=findComment&comment=989831

 

Quote

If you can't win with what you got, you gotta do something, even if it means one step back to take two steps forward.

 

https://www.blueshirtsbrotherhood.com/topic/24298-its-time-to-have-the-lafrenière-conversation/page/12/#comment-990665

 

Quote

One step back to try to take two steps forward, or at least figure out what to do next. This roster is a hamster wheel right now.

 

Vegas is 3rd in aggregated 5v5 xGF% since 2017 (Carolina, Boston) despite being through 3 coaches. They were 1st in xGF% during Gallant's 3 year tenure. The Rangers have consistently been in the 20s regardless of coach. What's the constant here? Oh right. The players.

[Pete]

4 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

 

I blew up your Berube angle. Eichel played 34 games last year coming back from his back surgery. Vegas seemed to be ok taking a step back last year in order to take two steps forward later. Hey, that sounds familiar:

 

https://www.blueshirtsbrotherhood.com/topic/24294-2022-23-off-season-thread-endless-pain-hatred-and-rage/?do=findComment&comment=989831

 

 

https://www.blueshirtsbrotherhood.com/topic/24298-its-time-to-have-the-lafrenière-conversation/page/12/#comment-990665

 

 

Vegas is 3rd in aggregated 5v5 xGF% since 2017 (Carolina, Boston) despite being through 3 coaches. They were 1st in xGF% during Gallant's 3 year tenure. The Rangers have consistently been in the 20s regardless of coach. What's the constant here? Oh right. The players.

You didn't blow up anything LOL.

 

And trading for Eichel wasn't a step back. It's the polar opposite of the moved you want to make. Vegas GOT the best player in the deal. You want to TRADE the best player in the deal.

[BrooksBurner]

1 minute ago, Pete said:

You didn't blow up anything LOL.

 

And trading for Eichel wasn't a step back. It's the polar opposite of the moved you want to make. Vegas GOT the best player in the deal. You want to TRADE the best player in the deal.

 

Nah. Getting the best player on paper doesn't really matter. That's too simplistic. It's about getting the right players given current roster construction.

 

You know the funny thing is that most, including myself, ripped Vegas for doing the Eichel trade and then missing the playoffs. The fact is they proved they knew what they had to do. Risk one step back to take two steps forward.

[Pete]

2 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

 

Nah. Getting the best player on paper doesn't really matter. That's too simplistic. It's about getting the right players given current roster construction.

 

You know the funny thing is that most, including myself, ripped Vegas for doing the Eichel trade and then missing the playoffs. The fact is they proved they knew what they had to do. Risk one step back to take two steps forward.

It wasn't a step back. They weren't in the playoff picture when they traded for Eichel. They traded for him to get into the playoffs as well as for the long term. Their intent was not to acquire a player and then miss the playoffs, that's just what happened. 

 

You on the other hand think that we can trade Panarin, give Laf his ice time, and use the 5 million in cap savings to somehow acquire an impact player.

 

So Laf + a <$5 million dollar free agent (because we have to pay RFAs) somehow gets us further in the playoffs than keeping Bread?

 

Pretty hot take. 

Edited June 9, 2023 by Pete

[BrooksBurner]

22 minutes ago, Pete said:

It wasn't a step back. They weren't in the playoff picture when they traded for Eichel. They traded for him to get into the playoffs as well as for the long term. Their intent was not to acquire a player and then miss the playoffs, that's just what happened. 

 

You on the other hand think that we can trade Panarin, give Laf his ice time, and use the 5 million in cap savings to somehow acquire an impact player.

 

So Laf + a <$5 million dollar free agent (because we have to pay RFAs) somehow gets us further in the playoffs than keeping Bread?

 

Pretty hot take. 

 

They traded for Eichel the first week of November. The season was only 10 games old. They made the trade with Eichel needing surgery and without a known timeline on return or how he would even look that year once he was back. They didn't care if it cost them the year, and it probably did. He was incredibly rusty coming back from that when he did make it back. Vegas was in playoff position and they fell out. Everyone laughed. Now this year Eichel has 23 points in 20 games this playoffs with a 56 xGF% and 75 GF%. Who's laughing now?

 

That is a hot take. Who said that?

Edited June 9, 2023 by BrooksBurner

[Pete]

49 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

 

They traded for Eichel the first week of November. The season was only 10 games old. They made the trade with Eichel needing surgery and without a known timeline on return or how he would even look that year once he was back. They didn't care if it cost them the year, and it probably did. He was incredibly rusty coming back from that when he did make it back. Vegas was in playoff position and they fell out. Everyone laughed. Now this year Eichel has 23 points in 20 games this playoffs with a 56 xGF% and 75 GF%. Who's laughing now?

 

That is a hot take. Who said that?

You did.

 

And you're also suggesting that they are taking a step back by adding the best player, you want us to take a step back by removing the best player and adding less effective players... Just because you want to move out a specific player.

 

You're also trying to spin the trade for Eichel into "well they knew they weren't going to make the playoffs but they did it anyway!"... They didn't intend to take a "step back". It just happened. 

Edited June 9, 2023 by Pete

[BrooksBurner]

31 minutes ago, Pete said:

You did.

 

And you're also suggesting that they are taking a step back by adding the best player, you want us to take a step back by removing the best player and adding less effective players... Just because you want to move out a specific player.

 

You're also trying to spin the trade for Eichel into "well they knew they weren't going to make the playoffs but they did it anyway!"... They didn't intend to take a "step back". It just happened. 

 

Nope.

 

More or less effective depends on when in the season we are talking. Panarin in the regular season? Yeah, there's probably a step back. In the playoffs? Jesper Fast is more effective than Panarin at 5v5. Imagine what can be accomplished with even $9M in space after considering 25% retainment on Panarin.

 

I didn't say that about Eichel. You did by claiming they weren't in playoff position and weren't going to make it anyway lol. I only said they were obviously OK taking an increased risk of short term pain and missing the playoffs. I equate that to being okay if it turns up as taking a step back, because they thought it was better for the long term.

Edited June 9, 2023 by BrooksBurner

[Pete]

31 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

 

Nope.

 

More or less effective depends on when in the season we are talking. Panarin in the regular season? Yeah, there's probably a step back. In the playoffs? Jesper Fast is more effective than Panarin at 5v5. Imagine what can be accomplished with even $9M in space after considering 25% retainment on Panarin.

 

I didn't say that about Eichel. You did by claiming they weren't in playoff position and weren't going to make it anyway lol. I only said they were obviously OK taking an increased risk of short term pain and missing the playoffs. I equate that to being okay if it turns up as taking a step back, because they thought it was better for the long term.

They didn't intentionally take the step back. It just happened.

 

I notice you didn't talk about the team who traded Eichel, in Buffalo, because despite Tage Thompson...They missed they playoffs. That's fine for them, they are a young up and coming team. That's not OK for the Rangers. If they trade Panarin, they may as well trade Zib, Kreider, Shesty, Fox.

[BrooksBurner]

59 minutes ago, Pete said:

They didn't intentionally take the step back. It just happened.

 

I notice you didn't talk about the team who traded Eichel, in Buffalo, because despite Tage Thompson...They missed they playoffs. That's fine for them, they are a young up and coming team. That's not OK for the Rangers. If they trade Panarin, they may as well trade Zib, Kreider, Shesty, Fox.

Semantics. Nothing is guaranteed, but they intentionally and significantly increased their risk of taking a step back.

The Buffalo analogy is grasping for straws.

[Pete]

38 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

Semantics. Nothing is guaranteed, but they intentionally and significantly increased their risk of taking a step back.

Not at all. Intent matters. They traded 1 roster player, Tuch. The assumption is that a rusty Eichel is better than Tuch. They missed the playoffs.

 

Quote

The Buffalo analogy is grasping for straws.

I'll take the dubya, thankyouverymuch.gif

[The Dude]

6 hours ago, BrooksBurner said:

 

They traded for Eichel the first week of November. The season was only 10 games old. They made the trade with Eichel needing surgery and without a known timeline on return or how he would even look that year once he was back. They didn't care if it cost them the year, and it probably did. He was incredibly rusty coming back from that when he did make it back. Vegas was in playoff position and they fell out. Everyone laughed. Now this year Eichel has 23 points in 20 games this playoffs with a 56 xGF% and 75 GF%. Who's laughing now?

 

That is a hot take. Who said that?

I really didn't think Eichel was going to return to form or ever live up to his draft status. Guy is really playing up to every expectation in the playoffs. 

 

I agree. Vegas wanted the better player and was willing to risk last season to set up for the following years, with Eichel hopefully getting 100% healthy and on his game.  They probably thought they had a chance to atleast make the playoffs last season,  but I'd think they were more focused on the next few years. 

 

 

[skunkman]

What is the coaching hold up?

[skunkman]

[siddious]

Rangers only team left without a coach right? Flames promoted huska and babcock to Columbus. 

[The Dude]

 

Im hearing the Rangers have been in contact with a "Noel Queenvale" to discuss her interest in the Rangers head coaching job.  Very little is known of this candidate except for the obvious... Well you know..  beautiful hair. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 10, 2023 by The Dude

[Pete]

Quote

Both Laviolette and Hynes are known for installing systems that emphasize an attacking forecheck and a strong defensive structure, sometimes to the detriment of creating offense. A former player who was with Hynes when the coach was a rising star with the Penguins’ AHL affiliate from 2010-15 said the team’s practices were “some of the most intense, high-energy practices I’d ever had, at any level… There was a purpose to all of it, he wasn’t making you skate just to grind you down, but you had to be moving with intent. He wanted his guys to be ready to skate that way in games.”

 

Hynes was just let go by new Predators GM Barry Trotz, who pointedly said when bringing in Andrew Brunette that he wanted Nashville to “become more of an offensive team.” Hynes’ stint with the Devils was tougher to evaluate, given Jersey was trying to find its footing with a young, uneven group. But in Nashville, where Hynes replaced Laviolette three years after the Preds went to the Final, a team with some veteran talent and solid goaltending never could score enough under Hynes.

 

An NHL player who was with Laviolette in Washington for part of the coach’s unsuccessful, three-year stint there said that Laviolette, despite being in his fifth NHL coaching stop, showed an ability to adapt in-game and to the world of data-crunching.

“We had a couple different looks on forechecks and depending on the game situation and the team we were playing, he was open to changing things,” the player said. “He had kind of an open platform at times — he took into consideration what guys were seeing on the ice. And I’d say more than most other coaches I’ve had, he takes into account numbers and analytics a little more. A few times there would be sessions on where the other team was scoring goals, the percentages and what we needed to do to shore that up.”

 

 

https://theathletic.com/4575290/2023/06/05/rangers-coaching-search-peter-laviolette-john-hynes/

 

[Br4d]

What exactly was the problem for Laviolette in Washington?

 

 

[The Dude]

22 minutes ago, Br4d said:

What exactly was the problem for Laviolette in Washington?

 

 

Injuries, stale roster, hardly any youth coming through the pipeline. Ive only brought it up like 5 times. 

 

There isn't a better option than Laviolette that wasn't unofficially banned from the league. 

[siddious]

5 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Injuries, stale roster, hardly any youth coming through the pipeline. Ive only brought it up like 5 times. 

 

There isn't a better option than Laviolette that wasn't unofficially banned from the league. 

We’ll I think it’s pretty clear that drury is waiting for the better option at this point. 

[Br4d]

The ban on Quenneville had to be based on how he dealt with the NHL post-incident more than how he dealt with the incident itself.

 

It's more likely that he was banned because he obfuscated in the official proceedings than for any other reason.

 

That makes it less likely that the ban will be lifted.

[Lord Al]

Either he has to know that Coach Q will be reinstated or he’s back to talking to Patrick Roy, since he’s at the combine

Edited June 10, 2023 by Lord Al

[BrooksBurner]

https://www.nhl.com/news/patrick-roy-wants-to-coach-in-nhl-again-but-is-at-peace-with-emotional-past/c-344795208
 

Quote

Patrick Roy would love to return to coaching in the NHL, but the four-time Stanley Cup-champion goaltending legend says he won't be sitting by the phone in the days ahead awaiting a call for an interview.

 

"It's hard for me to get a job because of the way I left Colorado," Roy said from Quebec City on Thursday, still weary four days after having coached Quebec of the Quebec Major Junior Hockey League to the 2023 Memorial Cup championship. 

"I know I made some bad choices. I know the way I left, everything I did, could have an effect on today's perspective on myself. I have to live with that. I know that I've learned from my mistakes. The past is the past but sometimes, you have to live with your past. I understand the situation."

 

Quote

"I understand now, better than ever, that you can't be in management and coach a team at the same time," Roy said Thursday. "If you're the coach, you coach. If you're GM, that's what you do."

 

Quote

"I might have taken things for granted when I started with Colorado," he said in reflection. "You think the door will always be open but you realize that's not how it works. When you have the chance, you'd better work hard. There are a lot of good coaches and good hockey people around and everybody is replaceable. It should be seen as a privilege when you have the opportunity."

 

Roy remembers a talk he had upon his exit from the Avalanche with Quebec native Alain Vigneault, who was coaching the New York Rangers at the time.

 

"Alain said, 'You know what, Patty? There are only 30 coaches (now 32) in the NHL,' " Roy said. "He was so right. There are very limited job opportunities in the League and having one of them needs to be seen as a privilege. It doesn't matter what you did as a player.

Good read. He really deserves a look IMO. Complete negligence to not even interview.