Who Will Be the Next Coach?

[Br4d]

Panarin was the only Ranger not to have a takeaway in the Devil's series.  He was not particularly active in the regard in the regular season.

 

My overall point is that you coach what you are given and it's not clear to me that there were major tactical adjustments to be made when your "best" player doesn't appear interested in participating in anything other than carrying the puck and making sharp passes.

 

 

[Long live the King]

"Panarin can't be coached"

 

Maybe take a look at his giveaway number under Quenneville and Torts versus Quinn and Gallant.  He also had 18 points in 16 playoff games under Torts versus 18 points in 27 games under Gallant.  Maybe he actually is better at being coached than free wheeling?

[Br4d]

Panarin has been here for 4 years now.  He's gotten comfortable.  That's the death knell for any real playoff chances he has.

[Br4d]

15 minutes ago, Long live the King said:

 

What does that have to do with throwing hits on the forecheck or Panarin's linemates crashing the net?

 

It has to do with when what Panarin wants to do is not available there is no second option with him.

 

There are other things too.  I thought Panarin was the best player on the ice game one.  Then things got very chippy in game 2 and of course Panarin vanished for the rest of the series, like we haven't seen this act from him before.

 

He's a great player but he's not a good playoff player.  Can't afford to have an 8th of the cap going there.  That's just begging for repeat problems next season.

[Long live the King]

7 minutes ago, Br4d said:

Panarin has been here for 4 years now.  He's gotten comfortable.  That's the death knell for any real playoff chances he has.

 

What does this even mean?  Oveckin and Backstrom took 10 playoff runs to win a Cup.  They had plenty of shitty outings in the 9 unsuccessful tries.

[Long live the King]

2 minutes ago, Br4d said:

 

It has to do with when what Panarin wants to do is not available there is no second option with him.

 

There are other things too.  I thought Panarin was the best player on the ice game one.  Then things got very chippy in game 2 and of course Panarin vanished for the rest of the series, like we haven't seen this act from him before.

 

He's a great player but he's not a good playoff player.  Can't afford to have an 8th of the cap going there.  That's just begging for repeat problems next season.

 

In Columbus he had 7 points in 6 games followed by 5 goals and 11 points in 10 games.  10 giveaways and 13 takeaways in those 16 games.  Seems like he performed just fine in the playoffs.  Main difference is Torts to GG.

[Albatrosss]

Or age. Or Wilson. 

[Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc]

What Panarin did 4-5 years ago on a totally different team is irrelevant. He's shown on 3 different occasions with two different coaches on THIS TEAM that he just can't do it. In the bubble he had Strome and Fast, last year he had Strome and Copp, this year he had Trocheck and Kane/Tarasenko and he for some reason just can't play with our best center.

 

But a new coach will magically turn him into a playoff player at 32? Good luck with that.

[Long live the King]

Who played well in 3 games in the bubble after how many weeks off? That's not a barometer for anything.  Last year Strome was hurt.  This year Strome was hurt.  Both years had GG free wheeling as the game plan.

[Pete]

Didn't fast get knocked out in game one against Carolina? And did the whole team wilt after that? Didn't they have to go with Hank, who was their third string goalie at the time because Igor was sick shitting himself in the locker room? 

[RangersIn7]

40 minutes ago, Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc said:

What Panarin did 4-5 years ago on a totally different team is irrelevant. He's shown on 3 different occasions with two different coaches on THIS TEAM that he just can't do it. In the bubble he had Strome and Fast, last year he had Strome and Copp, this year he had Trocheck and Kane/Tarasenko and he for some reason just can't play with our best center.

 

But a new coach will magically turn him into a playoff player at 32? Good luck with that.

I get your point, but it’s not as though no player’s have ever been bad performers in the postseason for years and then have that change. 

[Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc]

You can find excuses for everything, but at the end of the day he's failed 3 out of 3 times with the Rangers.

 

Even in Chicago under the great Joel Quenneville he only had 2 goals, 8 points and -2 in 12 playoff games. When they got swept in 16-17 he had one PP assists in 4 games and a -4.

 

The facts are that Panarin is not a good playoff performer and he's not a player you're gonna win a cup with when he occupies >10% of the cap. He's been considered as one of the best LW's of the game the last ~8 years and he's advanced from the 1st round only twice. Once with Blue Jackets and once with us last year.

 

Failed twice with the great Joel in the 1st round, one 1st round and one 2nd round exit with Torts and one ECF final and a 1st round exit with GG.

 

But sure, Panarin is bad because of GG.

[Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc]

3 minutes ago, RangersIn7 said:

I get your point, but it’s not as though no player’s have ever been bad performers in the postseason for years and then have that change. 

As bad as Panarin has been and then finally turned it around at 32+? I would need some examples to believe that.

[Pete]

The narrative that he's been "bad" really needs to stop, because it's nonsense.

 

We have people here who say he's bad in the regular season because he puts up 95 points but only 20 goals, or turns the puck over, or whatever.

 

Sometimes I think people don't really understand what it means to be truly bad. But maybe it's time to find another word, because bad isn't it. The numbers don't support it. The numbers support a handful of ineffective performances, but to say he's never done well in the playoffs is just not true

 

[BrooksBurner]

3 minutes ago, Pete said:

The narrative that he's been "bad" really needs to stop, because it's nonsense.

 

We have people here who say he's bad in the regular season because he puts up 95 points but only 20 goals, or turns the puck over, or whatever.

 

Sometimes I think people don't really understand what it means to be truly bad. But maybe it's time to find another word, because bad isn't it. The numbers don't support it. The numbers support a handful of ineffective performances, but to say he's never done well in the playoffs is just not true

 

He’s been a mix of bad relative to what he’s paid to do, and bad as in worst player on ice for the Rangers in the playoffs. His overall play might be passable if he were paid $1-2M like one of the 3rd or 4th liners who didn’t perform well.

 

You can’t win a Cup with a $12M player playing like he does in the playoffs.

[Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc]

2 minutes ago, Pete said:

The narrative that he's been "bad" really needs to stop, because it's nonsense.

 

We have people here who say he's bad in the regular season because he puts up 95 points but only 20 goals, or turns the puck over, or whatever.

 

Sometimes I think people don't really understand what it means to be truly bad. But maybe it's time to find another word, because bad isn't it. The numbers don't support it. The numbers support a handful of ineffective performances, but to say he's never done well in the playoffs is just not true

 

If you hold him to the same standard as a 3rd liner making 2 mill, then sure, he's not been bad.

 

When he's a superstar making 11.5m and averaged well over a ppg his entire career and then goes 0, 2, 2p -2 in 7 games with a lot of turnovers and bad plays then he's been BAD. Actually I don't think bad covers it enough. Horrible and borderline useless fits better.

 

And it's not as though I'm a Panarin hater. You can go back and check my posts. I've rarely been critical to his play in the regular season and I wasn't too harsh on him last year, but this year was just unacceptable. And I think all things considered, he's just not a player you win with. He's 32 next season, he won't get younger, faster or better. I don't see how he'll suddenly turn into a productive playoff player and if he doesn't we're screwed with his 11.5m albatross contract.

[Pete]

36 minutes ago, Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc said:

If you hold him to the same standard as a 3rd liner making 2 mill, then sure, he's not been bad.

 

When he's a superstar making 11.5m and averaged well over a ppg his entire career and then goes 0, 2, 2p -2 in 7 games with a lot of turnovers and bad plays then he's been BAD. Actually I don't think bad covers it enough. Horrible and borderline useless fits better.

 

And it's not as though I'm a Panarin hater. You can go back and check my posts. I've rarely been critical to his play in the regular season and I wasn't too harsh on him last year, but this year was just unacceptable. And I think all things considered, he's just not a player you win with. He's 32 next season, he won't get younger, faster or better. I don't see how he'll suddenly turn into a productive playoff player and if he doesn't we're screwed with his 11.5m albatross contract.

You don't have perspective when you're calling him borderline useless. He's still playing over 20 minutes and going against the best defenses which frees up other players.

 

And I don't understand why people reference how much he makes, nobody gets paid in the playoffs. The cap doesn't exist. It's a regular season thing. He's not stopping them from bringing anybody in, they just brought in Tarasenko and Kane. They got Copp+ last year. He's not stopping them from getting what they need, nor is he stopping them from keeping anyone of value. 

 

If anyone is sitting here saying they'd rather keep Lafreniere than Panarin as it sits today (forget the "what if" bullshit scenarios about how he'd have 65 points with PP time.... 65 ain't 95) that's just Laf-able. 

Edited May 12, 2023 by Pete

[Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc]

5 minutes ago, Pete said:

You don't have perspective when you're calling him borderline useless. He's still playing over 20 minutes and going against the best defenses which frees up other players.

Lol. A traffic cone can also be on the ice for 20 minutes, score 0 points and be a net - in goal difference when he's on the ice. That doesn't make it useful.

5 minutes ago, Pete said:

And I don't understand why people reference how much he makes, nobody gets paid in the playoffs. The cap doesn't exist. It's a regular season thing. He's not stopping them from bringing anybody in, they just brought in Tarasenko and Kane. They got Copp+ last year. He's not stopping them from getting what they need, nor is he stopping them from keeping anyone of value. 

Uhm what? Of course his salary is highly relevant in a hard cap league. We basically can't make any adjustments to our rosters this season. Imagine all the things we could do with 11.5m extra. The last sentence is also not true at all. We're discussing who we need to trade between Goodrow, Lindgren, Miller, Laf because we're so tight against the cap.

 

8 minutes ago, Pete said:

If anyone is sitting here saying they'd rather keep Lafreniere than Panarin as it sits today (forget the "what if" bullshit scenarios about how he'd have 65 points with PP time.... 65 ain't 95) that's just Laf-able. 

I don't think anyone's saying that. Now - Lafreniere at 2.5m giving us ~40-50p in the regular season and close to nothing in the playoffs OR Panarin at 11.5m giving us 80-90p in the regular season and close to nothing in the playoffs? I don't know. Laf seems like the best "bang for bucks".

[The Dude]

14 hours ago, Br4d said:

Panarin was the only Ranger not to have a takeaway in the Devil's series.  He was not particularly active in the regard in the regular season.

 

My overall point is that you coach what you are given and it's not clear to me that there were major tactical adjustments to be made when your "best" player doesn't appear interested in participating in anything other than carrying the puck and making sharp passes.

 

 

That's an odd stat, considering he, Goodrow and Motte were the only forwards that would forecheck and pressure any puck carrier exiting the zone. Very few Rangers had motor going in the playoffs. These guys and maybe Vesey did.

 

Everyone is shitting on the 4th line for their performance in the playoffs. Much like Panarin. I don't think they played that poorly. Aside from that bad change from Vesey in that OT loss, I thought they played with decent energy.

 

For once, I was in favor of slotting Goodrow up.  Something Gallant over did last season and I hated it. Kane was such dead weight, that Goodrows energy would have been welcomed in the top 6 for once. It never happened. I honestly feel that acquiring a hurt Kane was the worst thing they could have done. 

 

I've shit on Kane plenty. But any GM and any coach would have gotten him and tried to force him into the top 6, no matter how ineffective he was. Had Drury went in another direction,  I think things would have gone better. Ah well. Can't blame Drury for wanting to aquire an alltime playoff performer. 

 

 

 

 

[Drew a Penalty]

2 hours ago, Pete said:

Didn't fast get knocked out in game one against Carolina?

Yep. He played 2 shifts before getting knocked out immediately into his 3rd.
 

[Pete]

36 minutes ago, Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc said:

Lol. A traffic cone can also be on the ice for 20 minutes, score 0 points and be a net - in goal difference when he's on the ice. That doesn't make it useful.

Comments like this can't be taken seriously.

 

Quote

Uhm what? Of course his salary is highly relevant in a hard cap league. We basically can't make any adjustments to our rosters this season. Imagine all the things we could do with 11.5m extra. The last sentence is also not true at all. We're discussing who we need to trade between Goodrow, Lindgren, Miller, Laf because we're so tight against the cap.

I'll repeat they have always been able to address areas of need at the deadline. As for the bolded, the only ones worth exploring keeping are Lindgren and Miller. Goody can go, and Laf can go. Goody, who I really like, is statistically terrible. And even sometimes via eyeballs. Laf is laugh.

 

Quote

 

I don't think anyone's saying that. Now - Lafreniere at 2.5m giving us ~40-50p in the regular season and close to nothing in the playoffs OR Panarin at 11.5m giving us 80-90p in the regular season and close to nothing in the playoffs? I don't know. Laf seems like the best "bang for bucks".

Sure, if you don't care about making the playoffs. Look I know the playoff loss is fresh and there's recency bias, but the regular season matters and most agree that Panarin gets you there, and we all know there are guys that get you there (Panarin) and guys that get you through (Goodrow), and it takes 20 guys. Y'all are fixated on one.

[Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc]

20 minutes ago, Pete said:

I'll repeat they have always been able to address areas of need at the deadline. As for the bolded, the only ones worth exploring keeping are Lindgren and Miller. Goody can go, and Laf can go. Goody, who I really like, is statistically terrible. And even sometimes via eyeballs. Laf is laugh.

They've been able to get a few rentals at the deadline and it hasn't worked. Zibanejad is now looking at the 4th season in a row where he starts the season without a RW. The same goes for Panarin's line. We have no line that we know work and have chemistry. There's just too many question marks on the roster and too little money to fix it.

 

20 minutes ago, Pete said:

Sure, if you don't care about making the playoffs. Look I know the playoff loss is fresh and there's recency bias, but the regular season matters and most agree that Panarin gets you there, and we all know there are guys that get you there (Panarin) and guys that get you through (Goodrow), and it takes 20 guys. Y'all are fixated on one.

1. I don't agree with the idea that this team won't make the playoffs without Panarin. We've missed the playoffs with him, we've made the playoffs with him and there's no reason to believe we can't do it without him as well. Especially if it gives us ~10m to round out the roster.

 

2. That's not really how it works. Yeah the Goodrow's and Coleman's are more valuable come playoff time, but that doesn't mean the stars work are done. You don't think Hedman, Stamkos, Point and Kucherov did the heavy lifting for the two cup runs?

 

Stamkos - 46GP - 19g, 18a, 37p

Point - 46GP - 26g, 28a, 56p

Kucherov - 46GP 16g, 43a, 59p (!!)

 

If we're to ever win a Cup with this core we need Panarin to produce like Kucherov and we need Mika to be somewhere between Stamkos and Point. The 3rd and 4th lines are irrelevant unless does guys steps up. Mika did last year, Panarin hasn't done it in either years. That's why he gets the most shit atm.

Edited May 12, 2023 by Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc

[Pete]

2 minutes ago, Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc said:

They've been able to get a few rentals at the deadline and it hasn't worked. Zibanejad is now looking at the 4th season in a row where he starts the season without a RW. The same goes for Panarin's line. We have no line that we know work and have chemistry. There's just too many question marks on the roster and too little money to fix it.

OK and that's not on Panarin that Kakko and Krav sucked. Every team relies on young cheap talent. We have young cheap scrubs, so get mad at Panarin for making what he's worth? Nah.

 

Quote

1. I don't agree with the idea that this team won't make the playoffs without Panarin. We've missed the playoffs with him, we've made the playoffs with him and there's no reason to believe we can't do it without him as well. Especially if it gives us ~10m to round out the roster.

Yes there is LOL. He's the best player and around 100pt player. Ridiculous thinking, sorry. You're not getting $10M free, that's the piont. You have to retain or take back money in a flat cap. People need to stop saying this.

 

Quote

 

2. That's not really how it works. Yeah the Goodrow's and Coleman's are more valuable come playoff time, but that doesn't mean the stars work are done. You don't think Hedman, Stamkos, Point and Kucherov did the heavy lifting for the two cup runs?

 

Stamkos - 46GP - 19g, 18a, 37p

Point - 46GP - 26g, 28a, 56p

Kucherov - 46GP 16g, 43a, 59p (!!)

 

If we're to ever win a Cup with this core we need Panarin to produce like Kucherov and we need Mika to be somewhere between Stamkos and Point. The 3rd and 4th lines are irrelevant unless does guys steps up. Mika did last year, Panarin hasn't done it in either years. That's why he gets the most shit atm.

OK, and this is fine, my point is you don't trade the "problem", you fix it. I refuse to believe that it can't be, and if it can't be fixed, who else is going to want him? Hence untradeable, hence not worth discussion.

[Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc]

5 minutes ago, Pete said:

OK and that's not on Panarin that Kakko and Krav sucked. Every team relies on young cheap talent. We have young cheap scrubs, so get mad at Panarin for making what he's worth? Nah.

But he's not lol. That's the whole point. A guy that falters in the playoffs can't be worth 11.5m. Even by regular season numbers he shouldn't earn that much. He was 17th in points, 26th in EVP and 55th in goals while playing 0 minutes of PK and not being good defensively, but you want to argue he's worth the 3rd highest AAV in the league?

 

5 minutes ago, Pete said:

You're not getting $10M free, that's the piont. You have to retain or take back money in a flat cap. People need to stop saying this.

You seem to know that every other franchise agrees that he's not worth that much money too.

 

8 minutes ago, Pete said:

OK, and this is fine, my point is you don't trade the "problem", you fix it. I refuse to believe that it can't be, and if it can't be fixed, who else is going to want him? Hence untradeable, hence not worth discussion.

If it was fixable then I think it would've been done before he's 32. He didn't work under Quenneville, he kinda, but not really worked under Torts, didn't work with Quinn, nor Gallant. But at 32 with AHL coach Knoblauch he'll finally figure it out? I have a really hard time seeing that.

[Pete]

44 minutes ago, Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc said:

But he's not lol. That's the whole point. A guy that falters in the playoffs can't be worth 11.5m. Even by regular season numbers he shouldn't earn that much. He was 17th in points, 26th in EVP and 55th in goals while playing 0 minutes of PK and not being good defensively, but you want to argue he's worth the 3rd highest AAV in the league?

 

Stars are paid for what they do in the regular season. That's how the league works. There are stars who never even make the playoffs. Should they just play for free? Come on. Be rational, if not logical. Also judging a guy by one season (which happened to be his worst here) is just peak cherry picking. Judge him by his body of work or nat at all. It's been the best UFA signing in NY in recent sports history.

 

Quote

You seem to know that every other franchise agrees that he's not worth that much money too.

Again, be rational. It's like you're so fixated on winning the argument you forgot how the sport works because you're just going for the one-liner. He's not waiving to go to a bottom feeder. Of the teams that are playoff bound, how many can absorb his salary free and clear?

 

Quote

 

If it was fixable then I think it would've been done before he's 32. He didn't work under Quenneville, he kinda, but not really worked under Torts, didn't work with Quinn, nor Gallant. But at 32 with AHL coach Knoblauch he'll finally figure it out? I have a really hard time seeing that.

He had one or 2 bad playoffs his entire career. What's bad for your standards is not bad by many others.

Edited May 12, 2023 by Pete