No coach is good enough to win with a team that simply isn't good enough to win. While you might be right that the thinking part of the game is not Tortorella's strong suit (and I personally agree), the question you ask at the end there is not the question that needs to be asked.
You can't build around a coach in today's NHL where coaching changes are so, so common. On the other hand, you can't build around the core of players you have when the core of players you have isn't good enough to be built around.
What this team needs is to modify the core of players. We have part of the core, but we're still missing 2-3 major pieces that a core of a good team needs to be made of.
Also, in response to this Renney-Jagr nonsense, the only way Renney helped Jagr to "overachieve" is that he simply let Jagr do whatever he wanted, most of the time (and this is coming from a Renney defender). The increase in scoring in 05-06 is the biggest reason Jagr had such a great season.
Perhaps I shouldn't have been so cryptic, I agree with you 100%. You can't build around a coach. It's a lot easier to change one coach than 23 players. And yes, there needs to be changes and additions to the core but you can't fire the team. I believe good coaches adapt their systems to the available talent, not the other way around. And based on what I see during games and in overall asset management, I don't see that happenbing in New York.
I've never been a huge fan, but this season has just made me dislike him that much more.
I'm the other way around. I never liked him before but this year he earned my respect. 20 reporters and he's the only one with a set to stand up to that hot head after a game. Actually question his dodges. Isn't this what you want in the guy covering your team? If he's been brought into the story that is the fault of the coach who did it in front of the camera and other reporters, a couple of times already.