Tortorella should let Leetch give Rangers Brian power
Larry Brooks wants Torts to hire Brian Leetch as an assistant coach
Quote:
This is where Tortorella must have the most open mind of all, because if the head coach won’t acknowledge the need or isn’t receptive to the idea of adding such a specialist to his coaching staff, the move would be counter-productive.
Better to do nothing, better to leave the power play in the hands of assistant Mike Sullivan (if he does not leave the organization for a head-coaching job in Calgary), than force someone on Tortorella.
The perfect guy is standing right here, of course. That’s Brian Leetch, who has eased back into the fold doing some television work with MSG.
It is impossible to think of anyone who would be better in teaching gifted, young defensemen Ryan McDonagh and Michael Del Zotto the art of playing the point than Leetch, truly one of the most accomplished power-play quarterbacks of his time.
Totally agree that this critical issue needs to be addressed within the organization by adding new coaching staff ( Torts and Sullivan have failed here with ample to time to improve). Leech may or may not be that answer. Time will tell but doing something most likely is better than doing nothing here
Someone here said that Sullivan wasn't actually running the powerplay the other day. Brooks seems to think he was. By his own admission, Torts is not an x-and-o's kind of coach, so if Sullivan was only running the defense and the PK (like this poster claimed the other day), then who was running the PP? Has Perry Pearn been secretly still under contract with the Rangers? That would explain a lot.
Leetch played for Torts in 1999-2000 when Torts was an assistant coach under John Muckler. Leetch was on WFAN with Mike Francesa and Chris Russo when the Rangers retired #2. He said something about being interested in coaching. Becoming an assistant coach. His were young at the time and was not ready for that type of move.
Someone here said that Sullivan wasn't actually running the powerplay the other day. Brooks seems to think he was. By his own admission, Torts is not an x-and-o's kind of coach, so if Sullivan was only running the defense and the PK (like this poster claimed the other day), then who was running the PP? Has Perry Pearn been secretly still under contract with the Rangers? That would explain a lot.
torts runs the powerplay. he was a power play specialist when he was the assistant in buffalo. torts has run the power play since day 1 in new york.
torts runs the powerplay. he was a power play specialist when he was the assistant in buffalo. torts has run the power play since day 1 in new york.
Not saying you're wrong as I really have no clue on this issue, but I find it odd that someone so close to the team, and to Torts (Larry Brooks) would have it wrong then.
Not saying you're wrong as I really have no clue on this issue, but I find it odd that someone so close to the team, and to Torts (Larry Brooks) would have it wrong then.
Can anyone verify either side with some proof?
Yes there is proof, Torts him self said it many times. He said the Power Play is the head coaches job. Sorry I don't have a link, but I have to log out for work. I'll try and find one at lunch.
Totally agree that this critical issue needs to be addressed within the organization by adding new coaching staff ( Torts and Sullivan have failed here with ample to time to improve). Leech may or may not be that answer. Time will tell but doing something most likely is better than doing nothing here
Getting this team to the ECF a year before anyone had any right to expect it, does not equate to a fail.
Getting this team as far as they have without the services of any legit secondary scoring dos not equate to a fail.
The PP has not been what it should be and that is a fail, but that is where the failing begins and ends for this team.
Sully will get a Head Coaching spot, Torts needs to get someone in here that can do a better job with the offence and more specific, the PP.
Had we had a measely 3% better PP, we are 1st overall in the league. We are probably in the Finals as we would have won both rounds 1 and 2 in 5 games as opposed to 7 and we would have been a fresher team against the Devils.
Sather failed (through no fault of his own) to get that 2ndary scorer and Torts failed to produce a PP that could score at an 18-20% clip.
Having a former PP specialist coach the current PP doesnt always work. Sometimes you need the horses, not the strategy. Most of the time, it's the other way around. The Rangers have the horses. Their strategy is flawed.
The 1988 Rangers set a then NHL record for PP goals in a season. Their PP had guys like Norm Maciver, James Patrick, Tomas sandstrom, an ancient Marcel Dionne, Kelly Kisio and John Ogrodnick.
Certainly not guys you'd confuse with the 1976 Habs or 1984 Oilers.
But those guys shot the puck. They shot the puck from everywhere. Teams pressured the points back then just like they do today. It's not a new concept. The old Sabres under Ted Sator with Mike Ramsay, Uwe Krupp and Joe Reekie blocked a ton of shots. But the one thing the Rangers did is shoot the puck.
People though Brad Richards was going to be some awesome PP QB who would find open guys. Nope. Richards helped the power play by just hammering the puck.
I would want Leetch to coach just so he can still be around the organization.
Brooks briefly mentioned it in the article, but will Leetch be able to work for the organization with Sather still at the helm? I remember reading a few years ago that Leetch will not take on a big role within the organization until Slats is gone.
Getting this team to the ECF a year before anyone had any right to expect it, does not equate to a fail.
Getting this team as far as they have without the services of any legit secondary scoring dos not equate to a fail.
The PP has not been what it should be and that is a fail, but that is where the failing begins and ends for this team.
Sully will get a Head Coaching spot, Torts needs to get someone in here that can do a better job with the offence and more specific, the PP.
Had we had a measely 3% better PP, we are 1st overall in the league. We are probably in the Finals as we would have won both rounds 1 and 2 in 5 games as opposed to 7 and we would have been a fresher team against the Devils.
Sather failed (through no fault of his own) to get that 2ndary scorer and Torts failed to produce a PP that could score at an 18-20% clip.
those are the only two fails that I can see.
Agree mostly to what you said. And I did not use the term failure other than regarding the PP which may be a bit unclear but that was what I was referring to. Peace
Getting this team to the ECF a year before anyone had any right to expect it, does not equate to a fail.
Getting this team as far as they have without the services of any legit secondary scoring dos not equate to a fail.
The PP has not been what it should be and that is a fail, but that is where the failing begins and ends for this team.
Sully will get a Head Coaching spot, Torts needs to get someone in here that can do a better job with the offence and more specific, the PP.
Had we had a measely 3% better PP, we are 1st overall in the league. We are probably in the Finals as we would have won both rounds 1 and 2 in 5 games as opposed to 7 and we would have been a fresher team against the Devils.
Sather failed (through no fault of his own) to get that 2ndary scorer and Torts failed to produce a PP that could score at an 18-20% clip.
those are the only two fails that I can see.
His random line scrambling is fail.
His inability to adjust to variable situations if fail.
The PP is fail.
Lundqvist carried this team the whole season and into the playoffs. If he isn't beast+1 then we have no chance at all. We probably barely finish 8th if at all. You guys seem to love Lundqvist until it comes to defending Torts. We didn't win games by huge deficits. We're not scoring ridiculous goals. We don't have insane puck possession. We have a goalie and a couple defensemen who through themselves in harms way-- and I'm pretty sure the defense is Sully's job.
Torts does NOT do anything that significant for this team. He just lets guys play. He gets way too much of Henrik's credit. Recognize that if we had 95% of the other goalies in the league we don't finish in first. We don't make it past round 1. Henk stepped up this season. McD and Girardi did the rest. Richards with his occasional "oh ****!" goals was the only other thing that we had.
Sure the guys love him, but this guy has not done anything significantly well here. His system is nowhere near as good as the Devils or the Kings. His O isn't as good as the flyers. D isn't anywhere near as good as the Blues-- and Halak/Eliot couldn't even wash Hank's jock and their defense still dominated us. People need to stop using 1st place as an excuse for Torts. He didn't get us there.
and Chere's misfortune is the only reason that we don't have that 2nd line scorer. <3
Brooks briefly mentioned it in the article, but will Leetch be able to work for the organization with Sather still at the helm? I remember reading a few years ago that Leetch will not take on a big role within the organization until Slats is gone.
Things change.... it's obvious Sather is grooming Messier to take over when he retires. I could see Leetch letting go and coming onboard to help the powerplay. Primarily because its a job that is in such desperate need of improvement for the success of this team and Messier eventually being the man...
Fixing the Rangers PP, although perhaps a real challenge, is probably the simplest most effective improvement this team could make toward becoming a bigger success.
I would imagine someone with the will to take that job on would be really excited at the prospect of the results.
Not all great players are great teachers. Worth a shot, but it's far from a certainty. I don't think the movement at the point is the issue either. For years it's been "We don't have a true PP QB!" So we have two of them now, three if you count Stepan who essentially ran the PP at Wisconsin, and nothing has changed. It's not the QB, it's the strategy as a whole. Zero movement. There's a happy medium between creativity and strategy. The Rangers need to find that happy place.
imo kreider ends up on the point at some point next season. kreider actually takes the shot when he gets it, but in order for that to happen we need to get more guys playing in the crease. everyone on this team is either looking for the pass or looking for the shot. no split second decisions to shoot or pass and if they do shoot it's not a threat because nobody has enough power to force the shot to be blocked from the point. easy stops.
Torts has already coached Leetch before. I just wish Torts was the one saying all this not Brooks because it would be amazing to have Leetch on the bench.
The problem with our powerplay is we can't move the puck...we're too slow.
We get the puck down to one of our three forwards and they can't receive the pass, get pressured, of just give it up which in turn just makes us throw it behind the net and then we do that cycling crap that doesn't work. Or the D man gets it and clears it.
We need to be able to actually control the puck down low to have their guys come in on us. Then you give it to the point men who creep up a little to the top of the circles. Too many times this year I've seen our guys down low and then pass it back to the point to see Girardi or DZ at the blue line. MOVE UP. It's a lot easier to score goals closer to the goalie then it is from far away.
Things change.... it's obvious Sather is grooming Messier to take over when he retires. I could see Leetch letting go and coming onboard to help the powerplay. Primarily because its a job that is in such desperate need of improvement for the success of this team and Messier eventually being the man...
Messier may take over as President but it looks to me like Jeff Gorton is the GM in waiting. And that's a good thing.
Why is everyone, including our professional beat writer so obsessed with our former Ranger great being in positions they have no experience at? Just because Leetch was a great Ranger doesn't mean he'll be a great coach. Wasn't he lousy captain, beacuse he wasn't a great leader? A big part of coaching is being a great leader.
His random line scrambling is fail.
His inability to adjust to variable situations if fail.
The PP is fail.
Lundqvist carried this team the whole season and into the playoffs. If he isn't beast+1 then we have no chance at all. We probably barely finish 8th if at all. You guys seem to love Lundqvist until it comes to defending Torts. We didn't win games by huge deficits. We're not scoring ridiculous goals. We don't have insane puck possession. We have a goalie and a couple defensemen who through themselves in harms way-- and I'm pretty sure the defense is Sully's job.
Torts does NOT do anything that significant for this team. He just lets guys play. He gets way too much of Henrik's credit. Recognize that if we had 95% of the other goalies in the league we don't finish in first. We don't make it past round 1. Henk stepped up this season. McD and Girardi did the rest. Richards with his occasional "oh ****!" goals was the only other thing that we had.
Sure the guys love him, but this guy has not done anything significantly well here. His system is nowhere near as good as the Devils or the Kings. His O isn't as good as the flyers. D isn't anywhere near as good as the Blues-- and Halak/Eliot couldn't even wash Hank's jock and their defense still dominated us. People need to stop using 1st place as an excuse for Torts. He didn't get us there.
and Chere's misfortune is the only reason that we don't have that 2nd line scorer. <3
I'm so sick of people presenting their feelings as fact. Torts didn't "get us" to first. First is "an excuse." He "doesn't do anything significant."
This is the best league in the world, no head coach sits around and just "let's guys play."
Ideas about what percentage of other goalies would do this or that are 100% speculation.
Not having as good an offenses as the best offense or as good a defense as the best d isn't something to scoff at.
You give people what they want and they just demand something more. This team was more or less a joke last year, and this year they finished 1st in the EC and went to game 6 of the ECF. That's a HUGE jump. Last year anyone and everyone on this board would have been ecstatic to know that this team would play the way they did. Now, its "the coach doesn't do anything" "Hank is the only one who does anything" etc. etc. etc.
This team went from a laughing stock to a huge success in one year. I'm grateful. I wish other people were too.
I'm so sick of people presenting their feelings as fact. Torts didn't "get us" to first. First is "an excuse." He "doesn't do anything significant."
This is the best league in the world, no head coach sits around and just "let's guys play."
Ideas about what percentage of other goalies would do this or that are 100% speculation.
Not having as good an offenses as the best offense or as good a defense as the best d isn't something to scoff at.
You give people what they want and they just demand something more. This team was more or less a joke last year, and this year they finished 1st in the EC and went to game 6 of the ECF. That's a HUGE jump. Last year anyone and everyone on this board would have been ecstatic to know that this team would play the way they did. Now, its "the coach doesn't do anything" "Hank is the only one who does anything" etc. etc. etc.
This team went from a laughing stock to a huge success in one year. I'm grateful. I wish other people were too.
first is an excuse? how? torts admitted that he 'just lets guys play' (pretty sure that's an exact quote, too) on offense. he said he'll point things out here and there, but he said he focuses on the defense and 'let's guys do their own things' to create on o. he knows he's not an offense coach. the majority of fans know he's not an offense coach because he's not. he either needs an assistant or he needs to be gone. 'safe is death' means D comes first.
do you seriously think this team would've made it past round 1 without hank (7 game series...)? you don't have hank there 95%+ goalies would not have held us in like he did. could've easily had 6-0 10-2 games (see phili/pitts) against an offense-first team like the sens.
don't be ignorant. SURE we could've gone in and won the cup with a different goalie, but NOT the way we played the post-season. good teams sure, but 7 game series WITH lundqvist. how can you expect another goalie to come close? speculation my ass.
only reason this team looked SIGNIFICANTLY better this year is because we had lineup changes. do you honestly think this team is that MUCH better than last year's? especially without the personnel changes? if you do, then you're just clueless and this argument is pointless.
hank's not "the only one who does everything" BUT he is the only reason other guys were given the opportunity to step up. he doesn't stand on his head 90% of this season we're fighting for 8th place AINEC.
'so sick' of people that think that because we made it to the ECF that we're a better team. biggest reason we improved was the change in lineup.
ignorant fans... le sigh
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR Boyler87
I freaking hope so. Jeff Gorton deserves the job. I would feel great having him at the top of the ship.
