Albatrosss Posted January 23 Share Posted January 23 7 minutes ago, Pete said: Some also said you can't look beyond the coach until you have an actual coach. That's what we'll find out this year. Everything isn't black and white. I don't know where "excuses" come in, but whatever. Quote Lavvy had buy in. They were winning. Big complaint was they hadn't scored enough 5v5. When they tried to, they didn't defend well enough 5v5. They had injuries. They are playing with 2 lines, a 4th line, and an AHL first line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albatrosss Posted January 23 Share Posted January 23 6 minutes ago, Sharpshooter said: It's a good things Rangers fans don't overreact or anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted January 23 Share Posted January 23 2 minutes ago, Albatrosss said: What are you posting that isn't a fact? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albatrosss Posted January 23 Share Posted January 23 1 minute ago, Pete said: What are you posting that isn't a fact? GG had same problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Br4d Posted January 23 Share Posted January 23 This team sucks at 5v5. It was middling to good when the Panarin line was producing but they're not now and it just stinks. Zibanejad needs to wake up and understand that if he's the 1C he needs to score goals at even strength. Don't be so generous with the no-look passes, take those shots instead because in case you haven't noticed nobody is burying the no-looks any more. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted January 23 Share Posted January 23 2 minutes ago, Albatrosss said: GG had same problems. No he didn't. Team was remarkably healthy. GGs teams were never good defensively at 5v5. Also GG had peak Shesty. Don't forget the cultural gap the size of the grand canyon between the coach and the players. Lavvy early in the season had buy in. Then injuries came and there's some outside the system play happenning. He doesn't have peak Shesty. All things are not equal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albatrosss Posted January 23 Share Posted January 23 2 minutes ago, Pete said: No he didn't. Team was remarkably healthy. GGs teams were never good defensively at 5v5. Also GG had peak Shesty. Don't forget the cultural gap the size of the grand canyon between the coach and the players. Lavvy early in the season had buy in. Then injuries came and there's some outside the system play happenning. He doesn't have peak Shesty. All things are not equal. Healthy--probably yes. This team is NOT good defensively at 5v5. They suck ass defensively as much as they did last year. I really dont see much difference other that the occasional 1-3-1. Shesty was def. better last year. cultural gap between GG and the players i dont buy. It was told billion times about GG that he's a player's coach. Some players had career years under GG. i dont buy this at all even if you heard it on a podcast. I still maintain that its not the coach, not from what we've seen thus far. I yet to see any kind of significant difference other than Bread going berserk with offense. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangersIn7 Posted January 23 Share Posted January 23 1 hour ago, Sharpshooter said: It's a good things Rangers fans don't overreact or anything. They’re only discussing nuclear options. It’s a small miracle they’ve ever won a game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted January 23 Share Posted January 23 (edited) 40 minutes ago, Albatrosss said: Healthy--probably yes. This team is NOT good defensively at 5v5. They suck ass defensively as much as they did last year. I really dont see much difference other that the occasional 1-3-1. Shesty was def. better last year. cultural gap between GG and the players i dont buy. It was told billion times about GG that he's a player's coach. Some players had career years under GG. i dont buy this at all even if you heard it on a podcast. I still maintain that its not the coach, not from what we've seen thus far. I yet to see any kind of significant difference other than Bread going berserk with offense. When the team started the year hot, they were a much improved defensive team at 5v5. They couldn't score, and when they tried to open it up to score more, they gave up more. Not only has this happened at various points throughout the season, it happens at various points throughout the game. Sure, some players have had career years under GG. Some had career years under Quinn. If you want to discredit the feedback around GG as "something I heard on a podcast", then go for it. But what was said on the podcast is that it was the players saying that they were barely practicing, barely talking to the coach, and barely understood what they should be doing on a nightly basis. So if you don't want to buy that feedback that's coming directly from the players, I guess that's a choice. Of course you realize you can be getting the same outcomes even though the methods are different, right? You can paint the wall with a sprayer, or you can paint it with a roller, the outcome is the same but the method by which you got there is different and there's nuance there. Edited January 23 by Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangersIn7 Posted January 23 Share Posted January 23 Let’s all just accept now… Shesty is a flash in the pan. Adam Fox forgot that he was good at hockey. This staff couldn’t coach 8th graders. Im just gonna stop watching for a couple of seasons Rebuild starts tomorrow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Br4d Posted January 23 Share Posted January 23 The Rangers just need to figure out who the big subtraction is. The team doesn't come out to play some nights. This has been true through 3 HC's now. It's not the coach. Subtracting the coach will do nothing. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted January 23 Share Posted January 23 1 hour ago, Albatrosss said: Healthy--probably yes. This team is NOT good defensively at 5v5. They suck ass defensively as much as they did last year. I really dont see much difference other that the occasional 1-3-1. Shesty was def. better last year. cultural gap between GG and the players i dont buy. It was told billion times about GG that he's a player's coach. Some players had career years under GG. i dont buy this at all even if you heard it on a podcast. I still maintain that its not the coach, not from what we've seen thus far. I yet to see any kind of significant difference other than Bread going berserk with offense. And they suck at it, which is why they aren't any better. It's difficult to plop a new system down and get adoption too quickly, but it's even harder with this group of players. I don't care if it's because certain guys are too hard headed to buy in, or not smart enough, but those are the ones who will have to go. Others are getting by with the system, but not excelling, and need their roles and expectations for them adjusted (in particular 93 and 55). 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albatrosss Posted January 23 Share Posted January 23 1 hour ago, Pete said: Of course you realize you can be getting the same outcomes even though the methods are different, right? You can paint the wall with a sprayer, or you can paint it with a roller, the outcome is the same but the method by which you got there is different and there's nuance there. that's exactly my point. Its not the coach, its the players Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted January 24 Share Posted January 24 2 hours ago, Albatrosss said: that's exactly my point. Its not the coach, its the players That remains to be seen. I'm not going to sit here and say it's not the coach when GG was a full-on idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted January 24 Share Posted January 24 You guys are a prototypical case of recency bias. They were fine for the first quarter of the season with the 1-3-1, and the defensive play, especially in their own zone. You can argue it's not the coach, but you'd be wrong. They already showed that coaching can make a difference. They reverted to old habits. It's up to the coach to get them back on track. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted January 24 Share Posted January 24 Coach or players? Ive just been over here like Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Long live the King Posted January 24 Share Posted January 24 3 hours ago, Br4d said: The Rangers just need to figure out who the big subtraction is. The team doesn't come out to play some nights. This has been true through 3 HC's now. It's not the coach. Subtracting the coach will do nothing. People keep saying this. Quinn sucks. GG never lasted any more than 3 years. How are they relevant? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted January 24 Share Posted January 24 (edited) Delete Edited January 24 by jsrangers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted January 24 Share Posted January 24 6 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said: Coach or players? Ive just been over here like Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dude Posted January 24 Author Share Posted January 24 They beat the lowly Ducks with a solid effort from the 3rd line and now everything is A ok? Yeah no. It remains to be seen if this team can do what a coaching staff asks them to do. A lot of this roster is the same group from 3-4 years now. They are already showing for about a month plus now. that they are going to do what they want to. They've won 4 out of their last 11. The sky is kinda falling. How is it not? I have a lot if faith in this coaching staff. I'm losing faith in some of these players. I don't get how we can't blame the players for the same exact stuff they've been doing for years. We can mostly agree that they have a really good coaching staff in place to direct players on how to play. 2 1/2 (we'll count Gallant as half because, the players are not at all on record as saying they had an issue with GG. No player has said this. It can be dismissed due to that fact) coaches now and a few of these guys just won't budge. It'd be one thing if players were working within the system and were just going through a rough patch. That's not what's happening. It's an abandonment of the game plan. It's tuning out the message. A lull stops being a lull, when some players just do what they want. Buy in, or get out. Don't like the coach? Ask for a trade. If they don't get back to basics and play within the structure asked of them. Like at all.. How is that on a coach again? Sometimes some players are just not reachable. We can not pin this on the coach. Not again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted January 24 Share Posted January 24 40 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said: Coach or players? Ive just been over here like No, you're not wrong and you're not the only one saying it. I'm simply pointing out that it remains to be seen until the whole season plays out. Folks can't just ignore the first 20 plus games because they're upset with the last 20. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albatrosss Posted January 24 Share Posted January 24 1 hour ago, Pete said: You guys are a prototypical case of recency bias. They were fine for the first quarter of the season with the 1-3-1, and the defensive play, especially in their own zone. You can argue it's not the coach, but you'd be wrong. They already showed that coaching can make a difference. They reverted to old habits. It's up to the coach to get them back on track. I can go along with most of this except they were fine with their defensive play in the first quarter. They we’re not fine. They sucked at D coverage but were just lucky that they weren’t scored upon as much. Once they got pinned in their zone, all hell broke lose. It’s pretty easy to play against the Rangers defense. Dump the puck and retrieve. Rangers D is soft along the boards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vodka Drunkenski Posted January 24 Share Posted January 24 Hate soft D 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Br4d Posted January 24 Share Posted January 24 37 minutes ago, Albatrosss said: It’s pretty easy to play against the Rangers defense. Dump the puck and retrieve. Rangers D is soft. Just a minor correction. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted January 24 Share Posted January 24 43 minutes ago, Albatrosss said: I can go along with most of this except they were fine with their defensive play in the first quarter. They we’re not fine. They sucked at D coverage but were just lucky that they weren’t scored upon as much. Once they got pinned in their zone, all hell broke lose. It’s pretty easy to play against the Rangers defense. Dump the puck and retrieve. Rangers D is soft along the boards. The numbers disagreed with you, but you're welcome to your opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now