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

How Many Players Now Regret the Tortorella Firing?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-09-2013, 12:29 PM
  #176
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 15,275
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by shinchanyo View Post
What about looking at each objectively? It's not possible to get an accurate view of things simply by looking at the past nor is it going to be accurate if you only look at the present in a vacuum.
If you want to look at things objectively, the first 10 games were as bad as I've seen the Rangers play.

Bleed Ranger Blue is online now  
Old
11-09-2013, 12:35 PM
  #177
SnowblindNYR
Registered User
 
SnowblindNYR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 18,444
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
If you want to look at things objectively, the first 10 games were as bad as I've seen the Rangers play.
They're 6-2 in their last 8 and 2-6 in the first 8, of course you being you, you focus on the negative. Just tell me is your great pleasure in life trashing the Rangers? Because I understand objectivity, but reading your posts you'd think we're this year's Buffalo team every year. There's no objectivity in your posts because you only look at the negative of things. Posters that do that make this board unbearable sometimes.

SnowblindNYR is online now  
Old
11-09-2013, 12:38 PM
  #178
smoneil
Registered User
 
smoneil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rochester
Country: United States
Posts: 2,291
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
No, I'm not ready to say that. I still take Stepan, Callahan, Hegelin and Kreider over him.

Even if I agreed with the above (and I don't--I think Hags is just as effective anywhere in the top 9, and I think Kreider still has a LOT to prove), you've only offered 1 center and three wingers. The question isn't "do you take Dubinsky over Step, Cally, Hags, or Kreider." The question is "do you take Dubinsky over Brassard, Boyle, or Richards." To me that's a pretty easy yes. If we could roll a top 6 of Kreider-Stepan-Zuc and Hags-Dubinsky-Callahan, that would be a GREAT top 6.

It's also redundant. If Dubinsky were still here, I think he'd be back in most people's good graces (other folks, and it's obvious who they are, even hated Dubinsky when he led this team in scoring--they just couldn't get over the holdout). But he's not still here. He's on Columbus.

Let's make a deal--if we can all acknowledge that Dubinsky no longer plays here, then the anti-Dubi crowd can stop hating on him, and the pro-Dubi crowd can stop pointing out the factual/analytical biases in their posts. Deal?

smoneil is offline  
Old
11-09-2013, 12:42 PM
  #179
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 12,377
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
If you want to look at things objectively, the first 10 games were as bad as I've seen the Rangers play.
"as I've seen the Rangers play" is about as subjective of a phrase as there is.

But people arguing over this are wasting their time. Who cares how negative or positive someone else is?

Tawnos is online now  
Old
11-09-2013, 12:57 PM
  #180
ThisYearsModel
Registered User
 
ThisYearsModel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Country: United States
Posts: 7,073
vCash: 500
I for one do not miss Dubinsky. I like the young players we have now. Kreider, Stepan, Hagelin are all better players with higher ceilings than Dubi.

ThisYearsModel is offline  
Old
11-09-2013, 01:04 PM
  #181
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 16,033
vCash: 500
The team has played better, but they're 8-8. Let's not make AV out to some savior. The only reason why the Rangers season didn't collapse in October is because the division is pathetic and nobody ran away with anything.

Dubinsky was a clown after getting his deal. He stunk, then he got hurt. You think Torts didn't notice him half-ass every other back check like we did?

But people are giving Torts too much credit for 2012. That season was all Henrik.

GWOW is offline  
Old
11-09-2013, 01:17 PM
  #182
smoneil
Registered User
 
smoneil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rochester
Country: United States
Posts: 2,291
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GWOW View Post
The team has played better, but they're 8-8. Let's not make AV out to some savior. The only reason why the Rangers season didn't collapse in October is because the division is pathetic and nobody ran away with anything.

Dubinsky was a clown after getting his deal. He stunk, then he got hurt. You think Torts didn't notice him half-ass every other back check like we did?

But people are giving Torts too much credit for 2012. That season was all Henrik.

That's pure, 100% revisionist crap. He had a bad season. It started with a goalscoring slump that got into his head, and he reacted to it in the dumbest possible way (by not shooting at all), but his effort level was NEVER an issue here. He seemed to work even harder than he had before to try and make up for his lack of production.

smoneil is offline  
Old
11-09-2013, 01:20 PM
  #183
Barbara Underhill
Duuuuuuuuuuuuuuke
 
Barbara Underhill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Montana
Country: United States
Posts: 13,227
vCash: 500
9 games without giving up more than 2 goals a game, previous streak was 8 in 2010? Doing it while not collapsing and getting good production from more than one player. Seem to be trending in the right direction.

Barbara Underhill is offline  
Old
11-09-2013, 01:21 PM
  #184
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 smoneil View Post
That's pure, 100% revisionist crap. He had a bad season. It started with a goalscoring slump that got into his head, and he reacted to it in the dumbest possible way (by not shooting at all), but his effort level was NEVER an issue here. He seemed to work even harder than he had before to try and make up for his lack of production.
This is false.

Barbara Underhill is offline  
Old
11-09-2013, 01:24 PM
  #185
smoneil
Registered User
 
smoneil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rochester
Country: United States
Posts: 2,291
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barbara Underhill View Post
This is false.
Not one bit. It's not like we're talking about a season 10 years ago here. This was just a couple years ago. Hell, the main argument around here from the folks that wanted Dubinsky traded (ie- the people who hated him the most) was "it's great that he works really hard, but he needs to score goals for 4.2 mil." Even the people who wanted him gone recognized the fact that he always gave his best effort. I'd be more than happy to stop sticking up for Dubinsky if you and few others would just stop making **** up. He's in Columbus. You got your way (even though he DID bounce back--something that was impossible according to the trade Dubi for anything crowd). Let it go.

smoneil is offline  
Old
11-09-2013, 01:33 PM
  #186
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 smoneil View Post
Not one bit. It's not like we're talking about a season 10 years ago here. This was just a couple years ago. Hell, the main argument around here from the folks that wanted Dubinsky traded (ie- the people who hated him the most) was "it's great that he works really hard, but he needs to score goals for 4.2 mil." Even the people who wanted him gone recognized the fact that he always gave his best effort. I'd be more than happy to stop sticking up for Dubinsky if you and few others would just stop making **** up. He's in Columbus. You got your way (even though he DID bounce back--something that was impossible according to the trade Dubi for anything crowd). Let it go.
Exactly it was only a few years ago, do you think people forgot watching him already? You're mind is made up, and you will feverishly deny it for eternity I imagine, but on a lot of nights his effort just wasn't as good as it could have been.

Barbara Underhill is offline  
Old
11-09-2013, 01:33 PM
  #187
Affinity
Registered User
 
Affinity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Toms River, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 7,284
vCash: 500
Yeah, Dubi always put the effort in, he was just making dumb offensive decisions with the puck. He was still a good defensive player.

Affinity is offline  
Old
11-09-2013, 01:42 PM
  #188
Ryan McDonut
McD for Captain
 
Ryan McDonut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 3,665
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GWOW View Post
The team has played better, but they're 8-8. Let's not make AV out to some savior. The only reason why the Rangers season didn't collapse in October is because the division is pathetic and nobody ran away with anything.

Dubinsky was a clown after getting his deal. He stunk, then he got hurt. You think Torts didn't notice him half-ass every other back check like we did?

But people are giving Torts too much credit for 2012. That season was all Henrik.
how does a team run away with the division in the first month of an 82 game season? its not football where if the first 8 games are bad you are screwed. you are allowed to have a bad start (im not advocating it) because its a long season and there's time to turn things around.

Ryan McDonut is offline  
Old
11-09-2013, 02:10 PM
  #189
Drewbackatu*
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 3,048
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SnowblindNYR View Post
Damn, that's the most positive I've seen you, the league will take away one of our losses?

But anyway, unless you think your objectivity is the objective truth and 99% of the board is objectively wrong, calling it objectivity is a bit presumptuous.
That statement might be true but bear in mind that my objectivity is tinged with lotsa cynicism from years of abject failure. File this one under "old habits die hard."

Drewbackatu* is offline  
Old
11-09-2013, 02:15 PM
  #190
SoftEuro4thLiner
Registered User
 
SoftEuro4thLiner's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: Austria
Posts: 2,682
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smoneil View Post
Even if I agreed with the above (and I don't--I think Hags is just as effective anywhere in the top 9, and I think Kreider still has a LOT to prove), you've only offered 1 center and three wingers. The question isn't "do you take Dubinsky over Step, Cally, Hags, or Kreider." The question is "do you take Dubinsky over Brassard, Boyle, or Richards." To me that's a pretty easy yes. If we could roll a top 6 of Kreider-Stepan-Zuc and Hags-Dubinsky-Callahan, that would be a GREAT top 6.

It's also redundant. If Dubinsky were still here, I think he'd be back in most people's good graces (other folks, and it's obvious who they are, even hated Dubinsky when he led this team in scoring--they just couldn't get over the holdout). But he's not still here. He's on Columbus.

Let's make a deal--if we can all acknowledge that Dubinsky no longer plays here, then the anti-Dubi crowd can stop hating on him, and the pro-Dubi crowd can stop pointing out the factual/analytical biases in their posts. Deal?
I disagree profoundly. Way too many unproven players.

SoftEuro4thLiner is offline  
Old
11-09-2013, 02:16 PM
  #191
Drewbackatu*
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 3,048
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SnowblindNYR View Post
They're 6-2 in their last 8 and 2-6 in the first 8, of course you being you, you focus on the negative. Just tell me is your great pleasure in life trashing the Rangers? Because I understand objectivity, but reading your posts you'd think we're this year's Buffalo team every year. There's no objectivity in your posts because you only look at the negative of things. Posters that do that make this board unbearable sometimes.
I see plenty of objectivity on BRB's posts. You just have look at team, players and organization the same way that he and I do.

Drewbackatu* is offline  
Old
11-09-2013, 02:20 PM
  #192
Drewbackatu*
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 3,048
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GWOW View Post
The team has played better, but they're 8-8. Let's not make AV out to some savior. The only reason why the Rangers season didn't collapse in October is because the division is pathetic and nobody ran away with anything.

Dubinsky was a clown after getting his deal. He stunk, then he got hurt. You think Torts didn't notice him half-ass every other back check like we did?

But people are giving Torts too much credit for 2012. That season was all Henrik.
Completely disagree with that last statement. Like him or not, Tort's got the most out of the talent he had here and Hank thrived under his defensive oriented system.
People around here give Hank way too much credit for the meager success this team has had since he became the goalie on 05/06!

Drewbackatu* is offline  
Old
11-09-2013, 02:21 PM
  #193
smoneil
Registered User
 
smoneil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rochester
Country: United States
Posts: 2,291
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barbara Underhill View Post
Exactly it was only a few years ago, do you think people forgot watching him already? You're mind is made up, and you will feverishly deny it for eternity I imagine, but on a lot of nights his effort just wasn't as good as it could have been.
For all of your "your mind is made up" nonsense, think about this--I'm not the one changing what I thought two years ago so as to appear right. Two years ago, this board was FULL of people railing on Dubinsky because the "only" thing he brought that year was effort. They said he would never rebound. Now, he's rebounded nicely, and since that crowd is looking more and more wrong about that, the new narrative is that he didn't give effort?! You are literally contradicting what the anti-Dubinsky crowd said in his last season here.

So again, you can talk all you want about my "mind being made up," but I'm not the one changing my story so that I can look "right" two years later.

smoneil is offline  
Old
11-09-2013, 02:30 PM
  #194
smoneil
Registered User
 
smoneil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rochester
Country: United States
Posts: 2,291
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drewbackatu View Post
Completely disagree with that last statement. Like him or not, Tort's got the most out of the talent he had here and Hank thrived under his defensive oriented system.
People around here give Hank way too much credit for the meager success this team has had since he became the goalie on 05/06!
I think both sides are right. Torts did get everyone to buy into his system in 11/12, and they went far with it. Just because the team tuned Torts out the year after doesn't mean we have to minimize the success Torts had before that (and the same can be said for Renney before him--we've had a string of very good coaches since the 05 lockout--sometimes a change is just something a team needs).

11/12 was a convergence of a number of people having great years. Torts got 18+ guys to buy into a philosophy of team play and self-sacrifice--that's not easy. Henrik upped his game to yet another level. Girardi and McDonagh had career years. Prust had a career year. MDZ had his best season to date, which really saved the team's bacon with Staal hurt (remember how much we all thought that team was boned when Staal wasn't ready to start the season?). Stralman came out of nowhere to fill the gap left by Sauer's injury.

That was just a team that fought to a man to grind out everything they could. That starts with Torts, but it also only works if everyone responds, and they did.

smoneil is offline  
Old
11-09-2013, 02:36 PM
  #195
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 12,377
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drewbackatu View Post
I see plenty of objectivity on BRB's posts. You just have look at team, players and organization the same way that he and I do.
Did someone up and change the definition of objective on me?

Tawnos is online now  
Old
11-09-2013, 02:43 PM
  #196
Thirty One
portnor, pls
 
Thirty One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Victoria, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,802
vCash: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos View Post
Did someone up and change the definition of objective on me?
lol.

__________________


Rangers Unlimited
Hockey Graphs
Thirty One is online now  
Old
11-09-2013, 02:54 PM
  #197
SnowblindNYR
Registered User
 
SnowblindNYR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 18,444
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drewbackatu View Post
I see plenty of objectivity on BRB's posts. You just have look at team, players and organization the same way that he and I do.
I read that as in order to be objective you have to agree with BRB and me.

Do you know what the word objective means? The only thing that's objective is that we won 8-8. How good the Rangers are and how well they're playing is all subjective. I feel like people don't know what the word objective means and seem to think that anyone that disagrees with a positive opinion is objective.

SnowblindNYR is online now  
Old
11-09-2013, 02:56 PM
  #198
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 smoneil View Post
For all of your "your mind is made up" nonsense, think about this--I'm not the one changing what I thought two years ago so as to appear right. Two years ago, this board was FULL of people railing on Dubinsky because the "only" thing he brought that year was effort. They said he would never rebound. Now, he's rebounded nicely, and since that crowd is looking more and more wrong about that, the new narrative is that he didn't give effort?! You are literally contradicting what the anti-Dubinsky crowd said in his last season here.

So again, you can talk all you want about my "mind being made up," but I'm not the one changing my story so that I can look "right" two years later.
Changing what I thought? I always thought that. Rebounded nicely? In his last 121 games he's put up 64 points, compared to 54 in 77 games that's not even close. He's scored 5 goals in his last 44 games. .11 GPG, a far cry from .31 GPG he produced here in '11-'12. He still has a ways to go before you can say he has rebounded nicely. He is playing well for CBJ sure, but he's also being spoon fed minutes that he wouldn't be getting here, which tends to lead to more production. Aside from a few hits and his assists I really didn't notice him much when we played them either, won some faceoffs but he didn't backcheck extremely hard or break up many plays.

Barbara Underhill is offline  
Old
11-09-2013, 03:01 PM
  #199
SnowblindNYR
Registered User
 
SnowblindNYR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 18,444
vCash: 500
Here's a definition that most closely resembles what Drew and BRB think objectivity is, however they get the first half of it but not the second:

Quote:
(of a person or their judgment) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.
Drew thinks that because BRB and he are fans by being negative they're not being influenced by personal feelings. However they both forget the part about "representing facts". "The Rangers suck" is not a fact, it's an opinion.

BTW, I completely disagree with Drew and BRB's personal feelings not influencing their opinions too. Their feelings are completely influenced, just like the positive HFers. Except their feelings are negative, they see everything in a negative light as opposed to a positive light. Their hatred for Sather, if anything removes any pretense for not having personal feelings involved. When a team starts a season 2-6 and goes 6-2 the rest of the way to an 8-8 record and you only look at the poor injury riddled start with a team was learning a new system, it tells me that BRB is definitely letting his feelings dictate his "objective" opinions. When you ignore half the sample size to make your case, you CLEARLY have an agenda.

SnowblindNYR is online now  
Old
11-09-2013, 03:18 PM
  #200
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 10,687
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos View Post
Did someone up and change the definition of objective on me?
Quote:
Originally Posted by -31- View Post
lol.
Oh my God, that's HILARIOUS.

(Maybe Drew meant "objectionable"?)

BrooklynRangersFan 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 04:20 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.