View Single Post
06-23-2013, 04:56 PM
Registered User
Lerb's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,658
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by chosen View Post
All of the Rangers success is determined by arguably the best goalie in the game.

You want to talk of context without offering any other than your supposition that Torts somehow restricted the Rangers chances of winning the Cup.

So, I will ask the same question of you that I have asked others:

Assuming your evaluation of Torts is correct, is it safe to say with another coach who you deem worthy, that the Rangers would have won a Cup or multiple Cups?

I don't think so. If you believe that, than you believe their personnel was better than Boston's or Chicago's or Pitt's, or whoever. I could not disagree more.

The success of the Rangers so far has been based on Hank keeping them in games and hoping they can pull out close ones. If you believe a coach is going to open it up and succeed that way here, wait until you see how many shots Hank is facing, then.

With all of these coaching opinions, I'll bet Vigneault has a style not far from Torts unless there is marked improvement by some of their young forwards, which could certainly happen.

The NHL is a defense first league and has been pretty much that since Gretzky's Oilers.

By the way, if someone offers a theory of a coach not getting the job done, it is not up to someone to put that in context, whatever that means in this case.
Anytime a question is phrased in terms of how many cups can be won, it's not a logically valid question in assessing the point anyone is trying to make. Therefore, the argument and the idea of NYR having a better line up than BOS or CHI is just what it is, slippery slope and straw man. Did torts restrict our ability to win a cup? This year, yes. That's why there's a coaching change. I don't think opening it up offensively is the right way to conceptualize it. Torts closed the transition, neutral zone in terms of offensive play and restricted situations and players especially the D from systematically jumping in. No one, not AV or Slats is intending on playing in the wild offensive fashion many are suggesting. Torts did some thing incorrectly systematically, AV can now move forward with those changes in mind.

People keep talking about style as if getting a coach with a different style means a system overhaul. Style is different in ways a coach would get players to play toward a certain orientation of thinking in a situation where there are multiple options ranging in "correctness" based on other factors in the game. All the fundamentals stay.

You say AV is not different from Torts and yet you suggest that AV will be slanted toward offensive play. Torts did 80% of things right while we're looking for someone who does 90% of things right. Unfortunately, the 10% Torts is missing on is what has to be there win a championship.

Lerb is offline   Reply With Quote