HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Head Coach Vacancy Pt III: How's your spelling? (Eakins/Vigneault/Messier/Gretzky)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-30-2013, 03:46 PM
  #51
OverTheCap
Registered User
 
OverTheCap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 9,810
vCash: 500
I liked what Boucher did with Tampa in 2011.

However, I do remember reading after his firing that the veterans started tuning him out pretty quickly after that ECF run, and Yzerman and some of the players were not pleased about his reliance on the 1-3-1.

Not sure if Boucher is the right fit for now. Then again, none of the available coaches really stand out to me.

OverTheCap is offline  
Old
05-30-2013, 03:49 PM
  #52
jacko23
KCCO!
 
jacko23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Greensboro, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 559
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by poeman View Post


Cool is the rule.
not sure if serious..... either way, "absolutely not" to anyone on the Melrose train. ive never been sold on Melrose being a good coach. having #99 in his prime on your team would make just about anyone look like a good coach. and even still, he only went to the Finals with them once and his other seasons werent anything to brag about. and he coached, what, a MONTH in TB before he got fired?! big no.

jacko23 is offline  
Old
05-30-2013, 03:53 PM
  #53
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 16,895
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IBleedNYRBlue View Post
So in other words you want some random guy to coach.

How about a mod from here?

This is a win now team. You need to hire an established coach or at least an assistant with NHL experience.
Therein lies the problem.

This is not a win now team.

We thought we were with both Nash and Gabby, but with Gabby and Richards no showing on the season, being a win now team is/was a pipe dream.

Now, to get back to what we were hoping for, we still need that secondary scoring threat like a gaborik, we still need that top line center because while Stepan is a good player, I'm not convinced he is a consistent top line guy.

Need for Staal to get back to being Staal AND we need an offensive defenceman that can QB a PP

To soft at the top 6, to slow and limited talent on the bottom 6

the team has quite a few holes and no re-tread HC is going to address that.

Bring in a younger guy with a different approach and let him grow with this team. Because as currently constructed, we are no where near winning now.

pld459666 is offline  
Old
05-30-2013, 03:57 PM
  #54
Riche16
McCready guitar god
 
Riche16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: FL
Country: United States
Posts: 3,744
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
Therein lies the problem.

This is not a win now team.

We thought we were with both Nash and Gabby, but with Gabby and Richards no showing on the season, being a win now team is/was a pipe dream.

Now, to get back to what we were hoping for, we still need that secondary scoring threat like a gaborik, we still need that top line center because while Stepan is a good player, I'm not convinced he is a consistent top line guy.

Need for Staal to get back to being Staal AND we need an offensive defenceman that can QB a PP

To soft at the top 6, to slow and limited talent on the bottom 6

the team has quite a few holes and no re-tread HC is going to address that.

Bring in a younger guy with a different approach and let him grow with this team. Because as currently constructed, we are no where near winning now.
Unfortunately for NYR fans this is very true.

Riche16 is online now  
Old
05-30-2013, 04:03 PM
  #55
NYRKING30
Registered User
 
NYRKING30's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,904
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
Therein lies the problem.

This is not a win now team.

We thought we were with both Nash and Gabby, but with Gabby and Richards no showing on the season, being a win now team is/was a pipe dream.

Now, to get back to what we were hoping for, we still need that secondary scoring threat like a gaborik, we still need that top line center because while Stepan is a good player, I'm not convinced he is a consistent top line guy.

Need for Staal to get back to being Staal AND we need an offensive defenceman that can QB a PP

To soft at the top 6, to slow and limited talent on the bottom 6

the team has quite a few holes and no re-tread HC is going to address that.

Bring in a younger guy with a different approach and let him grow with this team. Because as currently constructed, we are no where near winning now.
Good post. Hit some solid points.

NYRKING30 is offline  
Old
05-30-2013, 04:07 PM
  #56
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,170
vCash: 500
Need to respond to this

Quote:
Not saying that Sather is a saint, but Torts lost the team, why would you keep him? Players won't perform well if they don't like the coach. Just as people typically don't perform well at their jobs if they don't like their boss.
Torts lost the team? Look at their record over the last month or so. They continued to play as hard as anyone. Hardly evidence of "loosing a team".

Quote:
Were you the type of person who got pissed because Messier had Roger Neilson fired? The Rangers were going nowhere with Torts. His style doesn't fit in today's NHL and doesn't play to the strengths of the team.
His style does not fit today's NHL? How many teams would trade places with the Rangers last year? How many would trade places with them this year? Since when does defensive hockey not win games? If his style did not play to strength of team, then tell me how two years ago, when they were picked either 8th or out of the playoffs, they finished first in the conference and within 2 games of the Finals?

Quote:
One or two players putting up a good season doesn't make a good offensive team.
Ok, they are not a good offensive team. And?

Quote:
The Rangers have continuously been one of the most boring teams in the NHL.
So what? Boring wins. The Devils made a dynasty out of being boring.
Quote:
They rarely dominated another team.
How many times did they make it past the first round? Who cares about domination? I just want to win.
Quote:
Does anyone think that the team would have ever won a cup with this grinding style?
Yes
Quote:
Give me a coach who focuses more on offense and gets this team at least in the top half of the league in goal scoring and PP percentage and let Lundqvist do his thing and we'll see results. The best defense is a good offense.
Defense wins. Always has, always will. How did the 'hawks prevail over the Red Wings in OT? 2-1.

True Blue is offline  
Old
05-30-2013, 04:09 PM
  #57
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Tromelin
Posts: 9,578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
Therein lies the problem.

This is not a win now team.

We thought we were with both Nash and Gabby, but with Gabby and Richards no showing on the season, being a win now team is/was a pipe dream.

Now, to get back to what we were hoping for, we still need that secondary scoring threat like a gaborik, we still need that top line center because while Stepan is a good player, I'm not convinced he is a consistent top line guy.

Need for Staal to get back to being Staal AND we need an offensive defenceman that can QB a PP

To soft at the top 6, to slow and limited talent on the bottom 6

the team has quite a few holes and no re-tread HC is going to address that.

Bring in a younger guy with a different approach and let him grow with this team. Because as currently constructed, we are no where near winning now.

Now back to reality....


This is a win now team. How anybody can say it isn't is beyond me. With Lundqvist in the last year of a contract, with great defense, and a solid nuclease of youthful and veteran forwards. Does the team have holes? Yes, the main hole being having the talent group not suited for the system the team runs. Which is one of the main reasons why we need a new coach. Imagine if the Rangers had a power play. We can't say they didn't have the talent to have a moderately succesful power play. The Rangers have holes, obvious holes but not huge gaping holes that a full rebuild is needed. The notion that the best guy we can hire is somebody with no experience that can maybe, hopefully, grow with the the team is ludicrous. It's not realistic to think that's the way the Rangers will go or is the right thing to do. Not for this roster.

The Rangers have the chance to hire Lindy Ruff and they should do it. The notion that coaches grow with teams and everybody lives in happyland is ********. The next coach of the Rangers is going to be judged by his record, by his execution of a plan, etc. The coach that needs time to "grow" with a veteran team will be out of a job after a season and we will be looking for a new coach next year.

Ruff is somebody that had teams that worked hard. He almost never had a team that spent over the mid-cap. He survived ownership changes, roster changes, and his system works. He is the best choice for the job. Why we feel the need to play the "who's the most obscure candidate we can find" game is beyond me. This is the Head Coach of a team that could easily find itself contending again next year with virtually the same roster AND an upgraded special teams. Yet we should bring in somebody that has to learn on the job??

Son of Steinbrenner is offline  
Old
05-30-2013, 04:14 PM
  #58
Jabroni
The People's Champ
 
Jabroni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 6,898
vCash: 500
Why did Boucher get fired?

__________________
Jabroni is online now  
Old
05-30-2013, 04:17 PM
  #59
Crease
Registered User
 
Crease's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,833
vCash: 500
To bring in Ruff would be to bring in someone who has failed over and over again at the NHL level. Yes, that's a simplistic way of looking at it, but so is assuming that bringing in someone without NHL coaching experience would lead to short-term failure. I'm not advocating we hire a guy like Messier or Graves. I'm more attracted to guys who've done well head coaching at the AHL or Junior level, or are assistant coaches on recently successful franchises in the NHL.

Crease is offline  
Old
05-30-2013, 04:22 PM
  #60
Inferno
HFB Partner
 
Inferno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Country: United States
Posts: 20,381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jabroni1994 View Post
Why did Boucher get fired?
because the Bolts sucked his last 2 years...but to me that was way more a function of the quality of goaltending and defense than his system or him in general. guy has won at every level hes ever coached at, and made it within 1 goal of the SCF.


just would be interesting to see how his system would work with our players...not sure any other coach out there has a very unique/dynamic type of system like Boucher does.

Inferno is online now  
Old
05-30-2013, 04:26 PM
  #61
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Tromelin
Posts: 9,578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crease View Post
To bring in Ruff would be to bring in someone who has failed over and over again at the NHL level. Yes, that's a simplistic way of looking at it, but its as simplistic as assuming that bringing in someone without NHL coaching experience would lead to short-term failure.
It's the most realistic way of looking at it. Ruff has his minuses but his teams were always tough to play against. His system works, he's good with young players, he knows how to get the most out of a future hall of fame goalie, he knows how New York works. He would command respect from the players.

Ruff coached some teams in Buffalo that were bad and they played respectable hockey.

The Rangers as currently built don't need a coach without experience. There have been more first time flame-outs like John Maclean and Bryan Trottier than coaches that were successful. Now after they fire Tortorella, on a team who's captain and all world goalie say took a step backwards they are going to bring in a first time NHL coach? That's crazy....

Son of Steinbrenner is offline  
Old
05-30-2013, 04:32 PM
  #62
Richter Scale
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,106
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhipNash27
Give me a coach who focuses more on offense and gets this team at least in the top half of the league in goal scoring and PP percentage and let Lundqvist do his thing and we'll see results.
They were in the top half of the league in goals for this year. 17 teams were below them. They were tied for 12th in the league. 2.7 goals per game average.

Last year it was similar. 17 teams below them. They were 13th in the league in goals for. 2.76 goals per game average.

This myth that Torts killed offense is ridiculous. Was it great? No – but who cares? It was arguably near good enough; defense and goaltending wins championships. Was the offense as bad as people seem to think it was? Hell no. And if people are expecting this team to explode offensively next year now that Torts is gone… unless there a significant change in personnel – you’re in for a big surprise.

The team’s scoring woes have had more to do with a lack of offensively creative personnel than the coach. Shockingly, Sather made some moves at the deadline this year that may have helped that to a degree. Is it any shock that in the 13 games after the trade deadline, with an infusion of some creativity and skill on the roster, that the team’s goals per game jumped to 3.6? They had an easier schedule in the following 13 games for sure – but in the previous 17 games the Rangers played against the same teams they played in their final 13 games, their average goals per game was 2.24. If you’re worried that includes more games against better competition (like Pitt)… An alternative way to look at it is, if you take the average goals per game the Rangers scored against the same opponents before the trade deadline, and weight them according to the distribution of 13 games played against each after, their goals per game shrinks to 2.12. So what changed? Was it Torts? Or the players? I don’t get why this is so difficult for people to accept.

Torts had some major issues - primarily the PP and the defensive zone scheme. But he really didn’t stop these players from being creative offensively or getting points on the scoreboard.



Quote:
Originally Posted by NikC
This is irrational fear. why does parting ways with a personality like Tortorella mean we're hiring Gandhi as head coach?
Is it really? Oh, I don’t know why people could possibly be worried about it… maybe because those who are expressing concern about this are, you know, looking at Sather’s history with NYR; the guy who is in charge of finding the next head coach?...

We don’t have an identity. Draft players with “character;” who cares about skill, creativity, or hockey sense!?!

We don’t have Leetch anymore. Don’t ever stop searching for his replacement! Sign Wade Redden!

We need a 1C. Sign Gomez AND Drury to ridiculous contracts!

Last coach was too monotone, too bland, too much of a player’s coach. Hire Tortorella!!

Team needs more JAM. Get all the JAM! All of it!

We don’t have a crease clearing defensemen or any snarl on the blueline. Draft McIlrath at the expense of some pretty good offensive prospects!

We don’t have enough offense. Sign Gaborik!

We STILL need a 1C. Sign Brad Richards to ANOTHER ridiculous contract!

We don’t have enough offense, again. Trade for Rick Nash and blow up an ECF team!

We lost our JAM. Get back the JAM!

We don’t have enough depth. Trade Gaborik and get back some depth!

We had a mediocre, lockout shortened, irregular season during which there was not more than 30 games in which the team played with a stable roster, but the team still made it to the second round? But no Stanley Cup, you say? Fire Torts!!


Last edited by Richter Scale: 05-30-2013 at 04:40 PM.
Richter Scale is offline  
Old
05-30-2013, 04:32 PM
  #63
WhipNash27
Quattro!!
 
WhipNash27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Westchester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 15,651
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue View Post
Torts lost the team? Look at their record over the last month or so. They continued to play as hard as anyone. Hardly evidence of "loosing a team".
Considering that Sather had no intention of firing Torts and then did based on exit interviews among other things and all the rumors out there are saying the same... Yes he lost the team. The players may have played hard, but they do so as professional players play for pride of their own.

Quote:
His style does not fit today's NHL? How many teams would trade places with the Rangers last year? How many would trade places with them this year? Since when does defensive hockey not win games? If his style did not play to strength of team, then tell me how two years ago, when they were picked either 8th or out of the playoffs, they finished first in the conference and within 2 games of the Finals?
The Rangers struggled in the playoffs last year against teams they should have beaten, they struggled this year as well. I don't care where they finished in the standings last year. The East was weak last year and the same team would not have accomplished the same feat this year. As I also said in my post, they never won a series in less than 7 games under Torts. Teams do not win Stanley Cups by consistently going 7 games throughout the playoffs. No team has ever done it by winning their first two series in 7 games. The system is built for playing tight games. The Rangers consistently took teams to OT and couldn't win. The system is made to play with very little margin for error. It's a system that just doesn't work. The Rangers had no excuse for not going to the finals last year and couldn't do it against the 8, 7, and 6th seeds. It was a dream scenario and they failed.

Quote:
Ok, they are not a good offensive team. And?
A winner needs a good offense and defense. Find me a Stanley Cup winner who had as bad of an offense as the Rangers in the playoffs, ever. BTW, every Cup winner since the lockout was in the top 5 in goals per game in the playoffs with the minimum being 2.76 goals per game. 4 of 7 teams above 3 goals per game.

Quote:
So what? Boring wins. The Devils made a dynasty out of being boring.
The Devils teams also could score goals. It's a myth that they were a "defense only" team. Sure they played a boring system, but they had players who could score and weren't winning every game 2-1.

Quote:
How many times did they make it past the first round? Who cares about domination? I just want to win.
Eliminated in first round in 7 games
Did not make playoffs
Eliminated in 3rd round
Eliminated in 2nd round

Sounds like 2 out of 4. And again, all series wins 7 games. Not sustainable over the course of the playoffs.

Quote:
Defense wins. Always has, always will. How did the 'hawks prevail over the Red Wings in OT? 2-1.
You can't win games without scoring. Teams need a balance of scoring and defense. Teams that can't score or can't defend won't win. The Rangers can't do the former. When you have the best goalie in the world, you have more leeway on defense than you do offense.


Last edited by WhipNash27: 05-30-2013 at 04:43 PM.
WhipNash27 is offline  
Old
05-30-2013, 04:32 PM
  #64
Inferno
HFB Partner
 
Inferno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Country: United States
Posts: 20,381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Steinbrenner View Post
It's the most realistic way of looking at it. Ruff has his minuses but his teams were always tough to play against. His system works, he's good with young players, he knows how to get the most out of a future hall of fame goalie, he knows how New York works. He would command respect from the players.

Ruff coached some teams in Buffalo that were bad and they played respectable hockey.

The Rangers as currently built don't need a coach without experience. There have been more first time flame-outs like John Maclean and Bryan Trottier than coaches that were successful. Now after they fire Tortorella, on a team who's captain and all world goalie say took a step backwards they are going to bring in a first time NHL coach? That's crazy....
im not sure his system would work with our players...its a speed/skating game. Weve got a lot of snails on our team.

Girardi, Clowe (if hes brought back), Pyatt, MDZ, Stepan, Brassard, Boyle, Asham, etc...none of those guys are above average skaters.

Stepan and Brassard coudl hang because of their talent, but the lower 3rd of our team would need to be remade....more Sjostrom type players to play his kind of game.

Inferno is online now  
Old
05-30-2013, 04:37 PM
  #65
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 15,277
vCash: 500
You know, I have to wonder just how many candidates will be extremely interested in the job given Sather's track record.

Like many fans on this board, he has had zero problem with using the coach as a scapegoat time and time again. Hes had a very difficult time constructing a complete roster, but despite that, a new coach will come in here and be expected to win a Stanley Cup in 3-4 years. Not exactly a wonderful situation.

Bleed Ranger Blue is online now  
Old
05-30-2013, 04:42 PM
  #66
JeffMangum
I'm v
 
JeffMangum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Listening to music
Country: United States
Posts: 58,445
vCash: 50
FWIW:

Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie 19s
DAL is also interviewing Willie Desjardins, who has been coaching the Stars' farm team, and will be checking in on Dallas Eakins as well.

Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie 3m
As @DarrenDreger reported earlier, DAL has already spoken to Lindy Ruff and will be speaking to Alain Vigneault about vacant head coach job.

Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie 31s
Now that VAN has interviewed Dallas Eakins, I would imagine veterans Lindy Ruff and/or Paul Maurice may get a look from the Canucks.

__________________
Soon.
JeffMangum is offline  
Old
05-30-2013, 04:45 PM
  #67
Barbara Underhill
Duuuuuuuuuuuuuuke
 
Barbara Underhill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Montana
Country: United States
Posts: 13,227
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan. View Post
I just don't understand why anyone thinks he's anything more than a mediocre coach. I'd rather have Ruff. And that's saying something.
I don't know if I'd call him mediocre, 97-78-20 close to .500 (.497) win% got points in 60% of games he coached. Only seven active coaches have a higher P% Bylsma (.671), Boudreau (.655), McClellan (.649), Babcock (.635), Quennville (.612), Tippet (.611), Julien (.604).

Look at what he had in net, he also doesn't use the 1-3-1 exclusively.

'10-'11
PlayerGSWLOTLGAASV%
Dwayne Roloson34181242.56.912
Dan Ellis2613762.93.889
Mike Smith2013612.90.899

G/G: 2.94
GA/G: 2.83

Forwards with career year in points;
Purcell, Bergenheim, Tyrell, Ritola

Stamkos, St. Louis, Lecavalier, and Malone had very good years, 2nd highest pt totals for the first two and partial seasons with solid production for the last two.

Guys in bottom six produced quite well.

He had 5 of 9 D-men who played at least 20 games end with a + rating, the highest was a +5.

'11-'12
PlayerGSWLOTLGAASV%
Mathieu Garon44231642.85.901
Dwayne Roloson31131633.66.886

G/G:2.83
GA/G:3.39

Similar production for most forwards won't include career years for rookies and scrubs but he got production out of his bottom six again.

Again 9 D-men played at least 20 games, two had a + rating highest was +6, Brett Clark was a -26.

'12-'13
PlayerGSWLOTLGAASV%
Anders Lindback21101012.90.902
Mathieu Garon165922.90.897

G/G:3.06
GA/G:3.06

Team tuned him out and he got canned after 31 games. Still got production up and down his roster though.

Plus/Minus isn't a great stat obviously but the defense in TB was not very good. In comparison the Rangers had 80% of the D they used in those years had a + rating.

Lundqvist's career worst GAA is 2.43 still below any of those goalies and his worst SV% is .912 same as Roloson's best in those years.

Long post is long.


Last edited by Barbara Underhill: 05-30-2013 at 05:45 PM.
Barbara Underhill is offline  
Old
05-30-2013, 04:47 PM
  #68
ecemleafs
Registered User
 
ecemleafs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 11,102
vCash: 500
Scott Stevens

ecemleafs is offline  
Old
05-30-2013, 04:54 PM
  #69
UlfSamuelsson
Save By Lundqvist!
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 97
vCash: 353
Ok serious question and coincidentally my name...
Ulf samuelsson assisted with the Coyotes for two seasons under Tippett.
Now head coach of Modo Hockey. Understand they finished slightly above expectations
He probably won't even be mentioned realistically,
but think of some of the young swedes for the future, not to mention the ones on the team.
Does anyone know his coaching style? He played defense during his career. Was a Ranger (that matters to some). Yes, he was a cheap shot artist lol.....

Still think Dallas Eakins would be the guy, but depending on coaching style, not the worst candidate.

UlfSamuelsson is offline  
Old
05-30-2013, 04:59 PM
  #70
Bob Richards
Global Moderator
Mr. Mojo Risin'
 
Bob Richards's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 48,024
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecemleafs View Post
Scott Stevens
New Jersey has quite the exodus of Assistants. Gotta start chaining them to radiators or something.

__________________
"New day, new hope. Richards Buyout 2014". -Ail
Bob Richards is offline  
Old
05-30-2013, 05:02 PM
  #71
JeffMangum
I'm v
 
JeffMangum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Listening to music
Country: United States
Posts: 58,445
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by stan the caddy View Post
Yes, he cares about his stats and his Vezina. That **** directly correlates to how much he gets paid, how well he's liked he is by the fanbase, and it determines his legacy. Those stats might just get him into the hall of fame one day.

It's not Torts fault that the team isn't loaded with offensive superstars. Derek Stepan isn't going to magically turn into Sidney Crosby now that Torts is gone.
Don't need to be loaded with offensive stars to win. The Rangers have one of the better defensive cores in the league, and they have the best goaltender in the league, as well. The offense is decent enough to be productive. Boston doesn't have any big offensive names. LA's top guns have similar/lower point totals to ours (aside from Carter vs. Callahan — that's the main edge. Rangers still need to add a top-6 RW to push Cally down).

I'm not saying they could have won the cup. But I do think that they would have faired better in the Boston series, and had a chance of winning that, had Tortorella not **** the bed. He was completely out-coached. He couldn't even get his team to bother setting up on the PP. Took him 3 games to put Kreider with Stepan and Nash when it's clear that his size and speed was needed against the Bruins' D. Took him way too long to scratch Richards/take him off the PP. McDonagh was finally put on the PP in game four, and it improved dramatically. These changes should have been made after game one or game two. Hell, McDonagh should have been on the PP all along. Should not have taken Tortorella until game three of the second round to figure that out.

JeffMangum is offline  
Old
05-30-2013, 05:08 PM
  #72
Barbara Underhill
Duuuuuuuuuuuuuuke
 
Barbara Underhill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Montana
Country: United States
Posts: 13,227
vCash: 500
Brass on Boucher from earlier this year.

Quote:
"Every day was a new challenge for the players, and every player was accountable to the team," Brassard said. "I've never played for a guy like him, a guy who is capable of getting the best out of every player. He was always in your head, always keeping you energized and motivated. It was always very motivating."
Not Brass but on Boucher

Quote:
Boucher is said to be an extremely effective communicator, taking great pains to learn everything he can about every player on his team so he can deal with them on a one-on-one basis. "He listens to all his players, regardless of their status," said Canadiens prospect Gabriel Dumont, who played under Boucher in both junior and briefly this season in Hamilton. "He knows each player and knows how he needs to manage each player."

Barbara Underhill is offline  
Old
05-30-2013, 05:10 PM
  #73
h0ckeyman
Registered User
 
h0ckeyman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 2,192
vCash: 500
Scott Gordon?

h0ckeyman is offline  
Old
05-30-2013, 05:12 PM
  #74
JeffMangum
I'm v
 
JeffMangum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Listening to music
Country: United States
Posts: 58,445
vCash: 50
Didn't even know Boucher was Brassard's head coach in Drummondville. Boucher definitely got the best out of him there.

JeffMangum is offline  
Old
05-30-2013, 05:12 PM
  #75
Mio41
Ron Harris #3
 
Mio41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 2,659
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecemleafs View Post
Scott Stevens
Could teach these wimps how to throw devastating body checks

Mio41 is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:53 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.