View Single Post
07-02-2012, 10:29 PM
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,434
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by bernmeister View Post
"Clown" is a bit much. My issue with the man is not his intelligence, but his apparent arrogance.

Torts is a my way or the highway guy, and like Billy Martin and the Oakland A's, where a case can be made he ruined a young pitching staff by overworking them, you can clearly say that Torts EXCESSIVE D first shotblocking at all costs style, in lieu of more intelligent play, is a big part of the problem.

We do not have great scoring, and need balance of both scoring AND defense, not just one or the other, to win.

Semin in...
Torts ... change or buh bye.

Yeah, I said it, I spoke the truth... again.
Wait so you're saying Torts doesnt encourage intelligent play? WHATTT. Playing good defensive hockey IS intelligent play. Limiting the mental lapses and weak coverage in your own end as well as not getting caught out of position or up the ice helps you win games. I highly, highly doubt Torts goes into practice telling these guys to block shots. Not everyone on the team block shots. Torts advocates an honest effort and a 'do whatever it takes' mentality. The PLAYERS have taken on that identity because they respect their coach not because they are scared of him. They choose to lay their body on the line. Callahan has done it since he came into the league under Renney. It is why he became a fan favorite and the captain of the team.

It's ignorant posts like yours that I try to ignore but its so hard. You act like Torts wants to coach this way. No he doesn't. In fact if you could pay attention and do a little reading you'd see that his comments from break-up day indicate he wants more scoring even if it means sacrificing a little bit of the way they play. Not a lot but a little bit. Torts was FORCED to implement that system because he knew we didn't have enough offensive talent to play a more run and gun type of offense. Adding Richards last offseason was just a stepping stone in the PROCESS of building a contender that doesnt just compete for one season but for years. He had to have a more defensive system because the majority of his players were more defensive minded or better on the defensive side of the puck. He played to the team's strengths to compete. Pittsburgh tried to play to their strength. So did Philly. Where did they end up? It's frustrating reading posts like yours that attack Tortorella. You guys have all the answers its amazing.

You spoke no truth. You just pasted BS all over your reply. Thank you captain obvious for letting us know we need scoring forwards. Torts already knew this. Again take a gander at his quotes from break-up day. Torts doesn't have the blinders on. You are too funny. "Change or buh bye." Save it. Guy was up for the Jack Adams award. What a terrible coach right? Has a stanley cup on his resume. A Stanley Cup when guys like Vinny L and Richards were very young in their careers. Sounds a lot like the rangers. Hmmm....maybe he knows what he's doing as opposed to some mindless fan who has never coached hockey at any level.

And btw the billy martin analogy is bs too. Torts didn't intentionally overwork his defensemen. He had no choice. Bickel wasn't able to keep up. Eminger was still trying to get back into a rhythm after recovering from an injury. I'd rather have a 50% McDonagh and Girardi over a 100% Bickel. They didn't have the depth. That's not Torts' fault.

People on this board need to really think before they "share" their opinion.

RGY is offline   Reply With Quote