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

John Tortorella

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-13-2011, 11:15 AM
  #176
ruckus*
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 3,554
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haohmaru View Post
So, they both had 44 wins. Torts didn't have a franchise player. Renney did.



Boston (Sox) choked every year until they finally won. I really can't agree about last year - we were "in" every game, but they were clearly the better team. Without Callahan, there's no way we take that series. And, I'll blame youth (McDonagh, Sauer, Steps, etc....) for being nervous and blowing the 3-0 lead over blaming it on the coach. Not much he can do there.



Sauer and McDonagh were rookies in their first playoff year. If I had to make the choice of Redden & Rozy in 2008-9 or Sauer & McDonagh in their first playoff series ever to play one 7 game series, I'd take R & R.



Did you watch Jagr in the playoffs? The guy was the only reason we made it to the second round. He was unbelievable. Still is, by the looks of it.

I'd argue that Torts has changed the entire philosophy of the organization (Glen) and that alone is worth the price of admission. He took us to the playoffs when the ship was sinking with Renney and has guided a very young team to always being competitive. I don't think he's the best coach in the league or anything, but he hasn't been given all that much to work with until now. I judge him after this year.
Most of this is pretty off base IMO. First, you tried to state a fact about the both of them that wasn't correct, and now you're brushing it off and again trying to devalue Renney because Jagr was on the team.

How can you say without Callahan there's no way we take the series? Obviously it made it more challenging but we should've been 2-2 with all the momentum and guaranteed of at least one more home game. I'm not sure how your opinion on how you perceive something would play out without us ever knowing helps further the point you're trying to make.

The coach has a huge part in that Game 4 loss last year. That wasn't Sauer and McDonagh. That was the entire roster. The team had no plan going into that third period and they were not prepared for what the Capitals brought. That's pretty hard to believe.

Hey you can take Redden and Rosi over those two all you want to prove your point. They're not better players than the two we've got now. And I'm someone who liked Rosi and always defended Redden because I thought he was still good enough to be a bottom pair D man for us last year (cap hit notwithstanding).

I'm not going to get into the Jagr thing because you can say Renney had him and Torts didn't, but I could go on and on with you about how aside from that one player Renney had a lot less to work with. But that's besides the point.

Your last paragraph just seems so typical of many that I see who support him/like him/whatever. It's so vague and doesn't actual take anything of value into consideration. Yes, I too enjoy the cultural shift this organization has gone through. But why again does Torts get the credit for this? Last I checked this started with the drafting of players like Staal and Dubi and Cally, all players who were here before Torts got here. The organization has gotten smarter, and they went out and brought in a coach that they knew agreed with the direction they were going. Torts doesn't run the show here. And he damn sure doesn't know a thing when it comes to our draft picks and amateur players, hell even our AHL guys.

The whole saving Renney's sinking ship thing is another one of those comments that's based on something that you think would've happened. Except the facts proved that during Renney's tenure his teams played their best hockey in February and March. So I could just as easily say that it would've righted itself. I doubt Renney blows that 3-1 series lead that year, and he damn sure doesn't get suspended.

I would hope he's guided this team to being competitive. The guy he replaced only made the playoffs every year he was here and has won actual playoff rounds. Torts actually found a way to miss the playoffs two years ago.

ruckus* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2011, 11:25 AM
  #177
JimmyStart*
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,569
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGY View Post
I didnt dislike Renney. I thought he did an admirable job for what he had to work with. But your the one who mentioned Torts predecessor. I;m not comparing the two. It's two different era's imo. Fans have been wanting to get younger so its not all on Torts that the roster has turned over. Guys like fedotenko, prust, boyle, richards, have been brought in because they fit his system. But they werent all brought in at once. It has been pieced together slowly. Championship teams dont find all the right parts over night.

And yeah torts lost his cool in washington a couple years ago but its over, its in the past. Are you really going to hold that against him? I mean cmon. Plenty of players do much worse in this league.

Blowing a 3 goal lead is torts fault? I'm pretty sure he wasnt wearing the skates in that game. He's the coach, he implements a system. Its the players job to follow through, they get paid the big bucks. Dont blame the coach thats absurd.

Saturday they played the best line in the league. I think they did a pretty damn good job. Could they have been better? Certainly. They need work on their offensive game. They played a lot of games overseas, there wasnt a lot of time to gel. Even Richards said it. Give it time.
You are dismissing way too many fair and legitamate criticisms just as many people are dismissing fair and legitamate positives. I feel the positives outweigh the negatives but I'm certainly not blind to the fact that torts has done some extremely stupid things and that things like Game 5 should not be dismissed entirely.

JimmyStart* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2011, 11:30 AM
  #178
Vito Andolini
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 923
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruckus View Post
The Capitals choke every year in the playoffs. The NHL is not the NBA. This isn't the top seeds advance and that's it. This team had no business losing to Washington his first year here, and unfortunately for him the team couldn't find a way to score another goal in Game 7 that year, because we thoroughly outplayed the Caps.
I have no idea how you can have this recollection of that series. We were completely outplayed by them. Outshot 216 to 166. They outshot us in every game, except for game 6 where they had a 5-1 lead on us at one point. The only reason that series was somewhat interesting is because Lundqvist played out of his mind for a few games early on.

Oh and that Game 7 you make sound like we were unlucky to lose...we managed 1 shot in the 3rd compared to Washington's 13. Even after Fedorov put us down with 5 mins to go, I remember us being completely inept in trying to generate much to keep the season going.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ruckus View Post
Renney had Redden and Roszival and Malik on defense. Would you rather them over Sauer and McDonagh? The youth thing is a little overblown IMO, especially considering the vets that we had before weren't world beaters.
And Torts had Del Zotto & Gilroy, along with Sauer & McDonagh...oh and Redden played more games under Torts than Renney.

There's a reason that teams with defense as green as the Rangers don't typically win championships. Game 4 of last years series vs. Washington is a good example.

Vito Andolini is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2011, 11:32 AM
  #179
JimmyStart*
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,569
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruckus View Post
Renney had Redden and Roszival and Malik on defense. Would you rather them over Sauer and McDonagh? The youth thing is a little overblown IMO, especially considering the vets that we had before weren't world beaters.

And again this isn't about two losses in Europe, it's more about the same issues with this team that have been here since he started his tenure are still here. It's not just two games.
Thought it should be noted that the "youth thing: is important because the youth actually developed under Torts. Cally is achieving his absolute utmost potential under Torts. Sauer hit the big stage and Boyle, prust, Girardi all took huge steps in their games last year. The development and strides are the thing being looked at here...not whether or not the youth today is better than Malik.

It is about the two games in Europe. "The same issues with the team" well how do you know that this years team has the same issues as previous years unless you assume that from this miniscule two game sample size this is the whole 82 game season in a nutshell.

Thats just overreaction . Now it's sensible to be like "God I hope this is just the horrible road trip because they sucked." They did suck but they also again had this horrible road trip, less practice time, guys are hurt, we're missing our top Defenseman, the PP hasnt gotten any time to click with BR at the point b/c again no practice oh AND WE CAME AWAY WITH 2 POINTS. Again we get a 10-15 game sample size and it's the same crap the whole time then this thread should be made NOT after just 2 games coming off a nightmarish road trip.

JimmyStart* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2011, 11:37 AM
  #180
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
 
haohmaru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Fleming Island, Fl
Country: United States
Posts: 6,731
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruckus View Post
Most of this is pretty off base IMO. First, you tried to state a fact about the both of them that wasn't correct, and now you're brushing it off and again trying to devalue Renney because Jagr was on the team.
Wow. I said he had 44 wins which was more than Renney ever had. I was mistaken and Renney had 44 as well. What's the big deal here? You're talking about Renney and waxing poetic and dismissing that Tortorella equalled Renney's best in wins in a season. And, yeah, Jagr is a big deal. And a big reason they were as good as they were. Show me the Tortorella player that had 123 points in a season. Or 100. Or 90. I liked Renney as a coach. I also think his time here was over - just like I'll think about Tortorella if this season isn't more successful than the previous two were.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ruckus View Post
How can you say without Callahan there's no way we take the series? Obviously it made it more challenging but we should've been 2-2 with all the momentum and guaranteed of at least one more home game. I'm not sure how your opinion on how you perceive something would play out without us ever knowing helps further the point you're trying to make.
Huh? We didn't take the series without Callahan and history proved me right. What are you going on about? The Caps were the better, and more talented, team.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ruckus View Post
The coach has a huge part in that Game 4 loss last year. That wasn't Sauer and McDonagh. That was the entire roster. The team had no plan going into that third period and they were not prepared for what the Capitals brought. That's pretty hard to believe.
No plan? WTF? That Gaborik/Lundqvist mishap clearly shook up the entire team.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ruckus View Post
Hey you can take Redden and Rosi over those two all you want to prove your point. They're not better players than the two we've got now. And I'm someone who liked Rosi and always defended Redden because I thought he was still good enough to be a bottom pair D man for us last year (cap hit notwithstanding).
But, see, we're not talking about NOW. We're talking about last year and a hypothetical situation of who would I rather have, two rookies on the blue line or R&R of 2008-9? Redden was actually decent in the playoffs, if you remember. So was Rozy.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ruckus View Post
Your last paragraph just seems so typical of many that I see who support him/like him/whatever. It's so vague and doesn't actual take anything of value into consideration. Yes, I too enjoy the cultural shift this organization has gone through. But why again does Torts get the credit for this? Last I checked this started with the drafting of players like Staal and Dubi and Cally, all players who were here before Torts got here. The organization has gotten smarter, and they went out and brought in a coach that they knew agreed with the direction they were going. Torts doesn't run the show here. And he damn sure doesn't know a thing when it comes to our draft picks and amateur players, hell even our AHL guys.

The whole saving Renney's sinking ship thing is another one of those comments that's based on something that you think would've happened. Except the facts proved that during Renney's tenure his teams played their best hockey in February and March. So I could just as easily say that it would've righted itself. I doubt Renney blows that 3-1 series lead that year, and he damn sure doesn't get suspended.

I would hope he's guided this team to being competitive. The guy he replaced only made the playoffs every year he was here and has won actual playoff rounds. Torts actually found a way to miss the playoffs two years ago.
Sorry, but Renney's reign ran its course. He had 327 regular season games as the head coach of the NYR and never finished higher than 3rd in the Atlantic.

Torts has had 185 games as NYR head coach (not including the few games from when he finished the season way back when). Tough to compare the two when Renney had almost double the tenure that Tortorella has had.

I get it. You don't like him, etc... I'm giving him another full season before I draw further comparisons to another coach that basically accomplished one playoff series win quite a bit longer tenure than Tortorella.

haohmaru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2011, 11:37 AM
  #181
RGY
(Jagr68NYR94Leetch)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,434
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyStart View Post
You are dismissing way too many fair and legitamate criticisms just as many people are dismissing fair and legitamate positives. I feel the positives outweigh the negatives but I'm certainly not blind to the fact that torts has done some extremely stupid things and that things like Game 5 should not be dismissed entirely.
I'm not dismissing anything. I agree what he did was stupid in Game 5 as well as some other minor things. But I'm not going to sit here and hold it against him forever. He is still the coach and imo a good one. No coach is flawless. But what it really comes down to is this board and fan base is never satisfied. People wanted renney out. They got what they wanted. They got a tougher coach who holds players alot more accountable than the last one and yet people still complain. Pretty much the deal is if the rangers dont do one of a) win the stanley cup, b) finish first in the conference, or c) dont finish in the top 4 then the coach and team are unsuccessful efforts. Its ridiculous. Torts wasnt going to take over and take this team to the stanley cup, not with what he had. If anyone really expected a cup then they are delusional. Over the past few years he and Sather have been gathering the pieces that fit his style of play and that fill out the depth of the team with the correct roles. Guys like Boyle and Prust, infusion of McDonagh, Sauer, Stepan as well as veterans like Gaborik and Richards. It is a process.

RGY is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2011, 12:11 PM
  #182
wolfgaze
Interesting Cat
 
wolfgaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGY View Post
I'm not dismissing anything. I agree what he did was stupid in Game 5 as well as some other minor things. But I'm not going to sit here and hold it against him forever. He is still the coach and imo a good one. No coach is flawless. But what it really comes down to is this board and fan base is never satisfied. People wanted renney out. They got what they wanted. They got a tougher coach who holds players alot more accountable than the last one and yet people still complain. Pretty much the deal is if the rangers dont do one of a) win the stanley cup, b) finish first in the conference, or c) dont finish in the top 4 then the coach and team are unsuccessful efforts. Its ridiculous. Torts wasnt going to take over and take this team to the stanley cup, not with what he had. If anyone really expected a cup then they are delusional. Over the past few years he and Sather have been gathering the pieces that fit his style of play and that fill out the depth of the team with the correct roles. Guys like Boyle and Prust, infusion of McDonagh, Sauer, Stepan as well as veterans like Gaborik and Richards. It is a process.
Yup, and then some fans act upset at the coach when the 5th youngest team in the league and the youngest blueline in the league gets bounced in the 1st round... In reality, we were fortunate to have even made the playoffs last year with the depth issues, the injuries, and inexperienced players we fielded last year.... Some analysts pegged us to miss the playoffs last year even without the injuries and knowledge of a slumping Gaborik, and they had good reason to....


Last edited by wolfgaze: 10-13-2011 at 12:20 PM.
wolfgaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2011, 12:17 PM
  #183
ruckus*
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 3,554
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vito Andolini View Post
I have no idea how you can have this recollection of that series. We were completely outplayed by them. Outshot 216 to 166. They outshot us in every game, except for game 6 where they had a 5-1 lead on us at one point. The only reason that series was somewhat interesting is because Lundqvist played out of his mind for a few games early on.

Oh and that Game 7 you make sound like we were unlucky to lose...we managed 1 shot in the 3rd compared to Washington's 13. Even after Fedorov put us down with 5 mins to go, I remember us being completely inept in trying to generate much to keep the season going.

And Torts had Del Zotto & Gilroy, along with Sauer & McDonagh...oh and Redden played more games under Torts than Renney.

There's a reason that teams with defense as green as the Rangers don't typically win championships. Game 4 of last years series vs. Washington is a good example.
So Torts gets all the credit for anything good but it's not his fault if we're completely outplayed for a series?

Yes the third period of Game 7 that year we were outplayed, but we played our style of game for the most part and really played a great first period and were in a position to win. We forced them to beat us playing our game, in a Game 7, on their home ice. Hank played great but he couldn't stop a shot he should've made a save on.

Gilroy was Torts' choice. DZ only played 49 games. And Sauer and McDonagh played like 10 year vets. I'm not sure I understand your point.



Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyStart View Post
Thought it should be noted that the "youth thing: is important because the youth actually developed under Torts. Cally is achieving his absolute utmost potential under Torts. Sauer hit the big stage and Boyle, prust, Girardi all took huge steps in their games last year. The development and strides are the thing being looked at here...not whether or not the youth today is better than Malik.

It is about the two games in Europe. "The same issues with the team" well how do you know that this years team has the same issues as previous years unless you assume that from this miniscule two game sample size this is the whole 82 game season in a nutshell.

Thats just overreaction . Now it's sensible to be like "God I hope this is just the horrible road trip because they sucked." They did suck but they also again had this horrible road trip, less practice time, guys are hurt, we're missing our top Defenseman, the PP hasnt gotten any time to click with BR at the point b/c again no practice oh AND WE CAME AWAY WITH 2 POINTS. Again we get a 10-15 game sample size and it's the same crap the whole time then this thread should be made NOT after just 2 games coming off a nightmarish road trip.
I don't agree. Cally and Dubi and Staal and Girardi were all entering their prime. To think that their play wouldn't have taken the next step regardless doesn't really make much sense. What I will give credit to Torts for is moving Dubi to the wing. His game is much more suited for it. However I don't think Dubi would have been stagnant in his progression had he remained at center. Watching all those players it would be a little ridiculous to assume they wouldn't continue to improve.

One of the biggest things people were so ecstatic about when Torts took over for Renney, that Torts knew he had to address, was the power play. It wasn't some foreign concept to him. He knew he had to fix it and people were thrilled and swore he was the guy to do it.

Well guess what, it still blows. It's blown the entire time it has been here and it blew in Europe. They can talk all the want about practice and boy I sure hope they're right, cause since he's been here all the practice time in the world hasn't seemed to help them. This team is going to live and die by its special teams, much like every team in the league. If it is not corrected we we will fail. I hope it gets corrected sooner rather than later.


Quote:
Originally Posted by haohmaru View Post
Wow. I said he had 44 wins which was more than Renney ever had. I was mistaken and Renney had 44 as well. What's the big deal here? You're talking about Renney and waxing poetic and dismissing that Tortorella equalled Renney's best in wins in a season. And, yeah, Jagr is a big deal. And a big reason they were as good as they were. Show me the Tortorella player that had 123 points in a season. Or 100. Or 90. I liked Renney as a coach. I also think his time here was over - just like I'll think about Tortorella if this season isn't more successful than the previous two were.



Huh? We didn't take the series without Callahan and history proved me right. What are you going on about? The Caps were the better, and more talented, team.



No plan? WTF? That Gaborik/Lundqvist mishap clearly shook up the entire team.



But, see, we're not talking about NOW. We're talking about last year and a hypothetical situation of who would I rather have, two rookies on the blue line or R&R of 2008-9? Redden was actually decent in the playoffs, if you remember. So was Rozy.




Sorry, but Renney's reign ran its course. He had 327 regular season games as the head coach of the NYR and never finished higher than 3rd in the Atlantic.

Torts has had 185 games as NYR head coach (not including the few games from when he finished the season way back when). Tough to compare the two when Renney had almost double the tenure that Tortorella has had.

I get it. You don't like him, etc... I'm giving him another full season before I draw further comparisons to another coach that basically accomplished one playoff series win quite a bit longer tenure than Tortorella.
You were making a point applauding Torts and using a statistic to make it seem like he's already done more, when the statistic you were using wasn't correct. I didn't say it was a big deal, I just said you were wrong. Which you are.

You do realize the season that Jagr had his insane season we were swept out of the playoffs right? Renney's best team was the year Jagr scored 71 points. Not 123. Just 71. With just 25 goals.

Remember when Marian Gaborik had 42 goals and 86 points? How did John Tortorella's team do that year? Oh wait, I know. They didn't even make the post season. And then he proceeded to throw his star player under the bus in the media.

How bout you do me a favor and show me the time Renney had a 40 goal scorer and couldn't make the playoffs?

Do you see how arbitrary your argument is yet when it comes to Jagr?


You can say whatever you want about Renney or whatever you want about any of the rest of it.

You can talk about Torts and the cultural shift and judging him after this year.

That's all fine.

I like a lot of things about Torts, and hate a lot of other things.

I personally just choose to judge them by results. And since Torts has been here, this team has gotten worse in the results department.

There's no way to dispute that.


Quote:
Originally Posted by RGY View Post
I'm not dismissing anything. I agree what he did was stupid in Game 5 as well as some other minor things. But I'm not going to sit here and hold it against him forever. He is still the coach and imo a good one. No coach is flawless. But what it really comes down to is this board and fan base is never satisfied. People wanted renney out. They got what they wanted. They got a tougher coach who holds players alot more accountable than the last one and yet people still complain. Pretty much the deal is if the rangers dont do one of a) win the stanley cup, b) finish first in the conference, or c) dont finish in the top 4 then the coach and team are unsuccessful efforts. Its ridiculous. Torts wasnt going to take over and take this team to the stanley cup, not with what he had. If anyone really expected a cup then they are delusional. Over the past few years he and Sather have been gathering the pieces that fit his style of play and that fill out the depth of the team with the correct roles. Guys like Boyle and Prust, infusion of McDonagh, Sauer, Stepan as well as veterans like Gaborik and Richards. It is a process.
That's professional sports in general with any fan base period. Not just here.

I didn't expect a Cup, but I expected progression. The results have proved regression. Not exactly what you're looking for when you replace a coach who had made the playoffs every year he was here.

Can we get off this whole Torts makes people accountable thing also? He benched Avery every game and can't stand Gaborik. How has that worked out for him?

When you replace someone you expect better results than prior. That has not happened.

ruckus* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2011, 12:19 PM
  #184
ruckus*
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 3,554
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfgaze View Post
Yup, and then some fans act upset at the coach when the 5th youngest team in the league and the youngest blueline in the league gets bounced in the 1st round... In reality, we were fortunate to have even made the playoffs last year with the depth issues, the injuries, and inexperienced players we fielded last year.... Some analysts pegged us to miss the playoffs, and they had good reason to....
Most of our young players have playoff experience. The whole average age thing who really cares. You take Prospal and Drury and Redden and Roszival off our team you not only get younger, but you get better.

And this year a lot of analysts have us pegged to finish third in the East and win the Atlantic.

They have good reason to?

And if we don't, then what?

ruckus* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2011, 12:22 PM
  #185
wolfgaze
Interesting Cat
 
wolfgaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruckus View Post
Most of our young players have playoff experience. The whole average age thing who really cares. You take Prospal and Drury and Redden and Roszival off our team you not only get younger, but you get better.
Oh please... Our 2nd D pairing in the playoffs was comprised of two first year rookies, one of which only had 40 games NHL experience... Our top 2 centers were a first year rookie and a player with 2 seasons NHL experience... But yeah, who cares about ages and playoff experience anyway...

wolfgaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2011, 12:24 PM
  #186
ruckus*
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 3,554
vCash: 500
I didn't mean to lump Prospal into the getting better when you replace him thing, cause I think he would help here this year. But the rest I meant that for.

ruckus* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2011, 12:30 PM
  #187
ruckus*
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 3,554
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfgaze View Post
Oh please... Our 2nd D pairing in the playoffs was comprised of two first year rookies, one of which only had 40 games NHL experience... Our top 2 centers were a first year rookie and a player with 2 seasons NHL experience... But yeah, who cares about ages and experience anyway...
You think Chris Drury is a better player than Derek Stepan at this point? Redden is better than Ryan McDonagh?

Hey if you want to try and sell me on this idea that the team was worse because of that, be my guest.

The only young player that really had a bad series was Stepan. All the other ones were more than formidable, including Gilroy whom I hated and didn't think had any business being in the lineup.

ruckus* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2011, 12:33 PM
  #188
wolfgaze
Interesting Cat
 
wolfgaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruckus View Post
You think Chris Drury is a better player than Derek Stepan at this point? Redden is better than Ryan McDonagh?

Hey if you want to try and sell me on this idea that the team was worse because of that, be my guest.

The only young player that really had a bad series was Stepan. All the other ones were more than formidable, including Gilroy whom I hated and didn't think had any business being in the lineup.
No clue what you're even talking about... If you expected the Rangers to advance through the playoffs last season without their best forward (Callahan) and with 3 inexperienced rookies playing significant roles on the roster, I don't know what to tell you.... Anisimov had 1 point in the 5 games, quite the formidable playoff performance for a top 6 forward? Apparently you're incapable of analyzing roster depth & experience as it relates to a coaches ability to produce results.... Torts & Renney were given quite different rosters to work with, yet somehow we're trying to compare the two coaches side by side as if they had the same tools at their disposal? I don't think so.


Last edited by wolfgaze: 10-13-2011 at 12:54 PM.
wolfgaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2011, 01:01 PM
  #189
Vito Andolini
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 923
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruckus View Post
So Torts gets all the credit for anything good but it's not his fault if we're completely outplayed for a series?
And this was said or implied by me where?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ruckus View Post
Gilroy was Torts' choice. DZ only played 49 games. And Sauer and McDonagh played like 10 year vets. I'm not sure I understand your point.
You don't understand my point?

You mentioned that Renney had Redden, Roszi & Malik...then compared them to Torts having Sauer & McDonaugh. You are cherry picking your players. MDZ played a full year in 09-10, along with the other shaky rookie, Gilroy.

And McDonagh played like a real veteran in the playoffs when he gift wrapped Washington their 2nd goal in game 4 last year. That was a rookie mistake that veterans like Roszi and Malik probably would not have made.

Also, Gilroy was Torts' choice? Who were the alternatives?

Vito Andolini is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2011, 01:39 PM
  #190
ruckus*
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 3,554
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfgaze View Post
No clue what you're even talking about... If you expected the Rangers to advance through the playoffs last season without their best forward (Callahan) and with 3 inexperienced rookies playing significant roles on the roster, I don't know what to tell you.... Anisimov had 1 point in the 5 games, quite the formidable playoff performance for a top 6 forward? Apparently you're incapable of analyzing roster depth & experience as it relates to a coaches ability to produce results.... Torts & Renney were given quite different rosters to work with, yet somehow we're trying to compare the two coaches side by side as if they had the same tools at their disposal? I don't think so.
So points are the only way that you assess how someone played?

Apparently you're incapable of "analyzing" something as obvious as results.

It's always interesting to me how facts never seem to matter in any argument I get in with you.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Vito Andolini View Post
And this was said or implied by me where?



You don't understand my point?

You mentioned that Renney had Redden, Roszi & Malik...then compared them to Torts having Sauer & McDonaugh. You are cherry picking your players. MDZ played a full year in 09-10, along with the other shaky rookie, Gilroy.

And McDonagh played like a real veteran in the playoffs when he gift wrapped Washington their 2nd goal in game 4 last year. That was a rookie mistake that veterans like Roszi and Malik probably would not have made.

Also, Gilroy was Torts' choice? Who were the alternatives?
You're talking about how bad we were in that playoff series while trying to defend the job the coach has done here. That's where I get that implication.

Gilroy was Torts' choice over Eminger, who had outplayed him the majority of the season, by a mile.

So we only look at mistakes made by players who are lacking experience and instantly attribute that mistake to that?

Why aren't we mentioning the mistakes made by players who are veterans? And what's their excuse?

ruckus* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2011, 01:40 PM
  #191
ruckus*
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 3,554
vCash: 500
There's supposed to be a sarcasm face next to my second comment there wolfgaze but I can't edit.

ruckus* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2011, 02:49 PM
  #192
wolfgaze
Interesting Cat
 
wolfgaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruckus View Post
So points are the only way that you assess how someone played?

Apparently you're incapable of "analyzing" something as obvious as results.
You said the performances were "more than formidable"... I informed you that Anisimov was one of our top 2 centers and pointed out his inexperience (along with Stepan's)... 1 point in 5 games from one of our top 2 centers is a "more than formidable" performance by our standards? In a series that the Rangers lost? I watched every game of the series.... AA wasn't bad or awful, but he wasn't great, terrific, or solid either.... No one ever said points were the only way to judge the players, but 1 goal in 5 games and only 1 point, is not an acceptable performance from a top center on your team if you are hoping to advance in the playoffs, now is it? Which proves my point... The team was way too young and inexperienced to do any damage in the playoffs...

Quote:
It's always interesting to me how facts never seem to matter in any argument I get in with you.
It always amazes me how you manage to misconstrue simple points people are making, which results in never-ending arguments. As evidenced with the exchange above with Vito... If you need clarification on a point someone is making, ask them...


Last edited by wolfgaze: 10-13-2011 at 02:57 PM.
wolfgaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2011, 03:12 PM
  #193
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
 
haohmaru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Fleming Island, Fl
Country: United States
Posts: 6,731
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruckus View Post

You were making a point applauding Torts and using a statistic to make it seem like he's already done more, when the statistic you were using wasn't correct. I didn't say it was a big deal, I just said you were wrong. Which you are.

You do realize the season that Jagr had his insane season we were swept out of the playoffs right? Renney's best team was the year Jagr scored 71 points. Not 123. Just 71. With just 25 goals.
Really? Renney had 44 wins, which you so graciously pointed out, when Jagr had 123 points. No? Look it up.

Now, if we're measuring playoff success, Renney's best result came in the following 2 years where Jagr had 26 points in 20 playoff games. Which year that he made it to the 2nd round do you consider the "best"?

(Edit) Besides, my argument was that Jagr took the team on his back during the playoffs and that lead to the Rangers success in the playoffs. I don't know what 71 points has to do with anything.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ruckus View Post
Remember when Marian Gaborik had 42 goals and 86 points? How did John Tortorella's team do that year? Oh wait, I know. They didn't even make the post season. And then he proceeded to throw his star player under the bus in the media.
How many points did Gaborik have in those 5 playoff games again? Oh, yeah, it was 2. Was that comparable to Jagr?

While we're at it - are you seriously comparing one of the all time greatest players to ever play in this league as roughly equal to Gaborik? Seriously?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ruckus View Post
How bout you do me a favor and show me the time Renney had a 40 goal scorer and couldn't make the playoffs?
Penner had 32 and he didn't make it. But, the above is a pretty random stat, and the scoring dropped off quite dramatically after Gaborik.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ruckus View Post
You can say whatever you want about Renney or whatever you want about any of the rest of it.

You can talk about Torts and the cultural shift and judging him after this year.

That's all fine.

I like a lot of things about Torts, and hate a lot of other things.

I personally just choose to judge them by results. And since Torts has been here, this team has gotten worse in the results department.

There's no way to dispute that.
44 Wins disputes that. Making the playoffs last year after not making it the year before disputes that.




Quote:
Originally Posted by ruckus View Post
That's professional sports in general with any fan base period. Not just here.

I didn't expect a Cup, but I expected progression. The results have proved regression. Not exactly what you're looking for when you replace a coach who had made the playoffs every year he was here.

Can we get off this whole Torts makes people accountable thing also? He benched Avery every game and can't stand Gaborik. How has that worked out for him?

When you replace someone you expect better results than prior. That has not happened.
When you're changing a philosophy and developing a young team results are the goal at least 3 years down the road. Impatience often kills that.


Last edited by haohmaru: 10-13-2011 at 03:26 PM.
haohmaru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2011, 04:05 PM
  #194
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 14,207
vCash: 500
The thing I find funny about people complaining about the results of the last two years is this:

When both seasons began, what did almost all of us predict? A 7-10 finish and likely first round exit. Where did we finish? 9th, 8th with a first round exit, 7th with a first round exit (I actually don't consider the 7th place finish part of his resume here, it wasn't really his team) . In other words, Tortorella's teams have met our expectations while changing the identity of the team and the makeup of the roster in terms of youth/vet mix. Why haven't we seen more improvement? Look at the GM for that one, not the coach (we don't need to get into Sather in this thread). The coach's job is to maximize the team's ability. If somehow they overachieve, that's a bonus, not a requirement.

Some of you expect more out of your coaches. I just think it's ridiculous to criticize a guy's results when all he's done is meet expectations.

Tawnos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2011, 04:07 PM
  #195
wolfgaze
Interesting Cat
 
wolfgaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos View Post
The thing I find funny about people complaining about the results of the last two years is this:

When both seasons began, what did almost all of us predict? A 7-10 finish and likely first round exit. Where did we finish? 9th, 8th with a first round exit, 7th with a first round exit (I actually don't consider the 7th place finish part of his resume here, it wasn't really his team) . In other words, Tortorella's teams have met our expectations while changing the identity of the team and the makeup of the roster in terms of youth/vet mix. Why haven't we seen more improvement? Look at the GM for that one, not the coach (we don't need to get into Sather in this thread). The coach's job is to maximize the team's ability. If somehow they overachieve, that's a bonus, not a requirement.

Some of you expect more out of your coaches. I just think it's ridiculous to criticize a guy's results when all he's done is meet expectations.
Agreed and well said. People need to temper their expectations with reality, and that includes roster make-up (players age & experience), team depth, and consideration for how injuries have impacted a season...

wolfgaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2011, 04:28 PM
  #196
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 14,207
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfgaze View Post
Agreed and well said. People need to temper their expectations with reality, and that includes roster make-up (players age & experience), team depth, and consideration for how injuries have impacted a season...
Exactly.

That being said, I do think the question of how a coach arrives at those results is a legitimate discussion. I do think that Tortorella is slightly too quick to change lines, even though I think it would happen eventually with any coach we hired. I also think he has a bad habit of overplaying certain guys and playing guys in the wrong situations. For example, last year we saw a lot of Boyle and Prust on the ice in the last minute or two of one-goal games that we were losing. I get that these are two of your most reliable players in general, but their butts (particularly Prust's) should be riding the pine in those situations. If your talented offensive players aren't on the ice in those situations, then what the **** are they for? Those kinds of things irk me a little bit, but overall I like the job he's doing.

Tawnos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2011, 07:45 AM
  #197
JimmyStart*
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,569
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfgaze View Post
You said the performances were "more than formidable"... I informed you that Anisimov was one of our top 2 centers and pointed out his inexperience (along with Stepan's)... 1 point in 5 games from one of our top 2 centers is a "more than formidable" performance by our standards? In a series that the Rangers lost? I watched every game of the series.... AA wasn't bad or awful, but he wasn't great, terrific, or solid either.... No one ever said points were the only way to judge the players, but 1 goal in 5 games and only 1 point, is not an acceptable performance from a top center on your team if you are hoping to advance in the playoffs, now is it? Which proves my point... The team was way too young and inexperienced to do any damage in the playoffs...



It always amazes me how you manage to misconstrue simple points people are making, which results in never-ending arguments. As evidenced with the exchange above with Vito... If you need clarification on a point someone is making, ask them...
The bolded is the problem here with a lot of people. Misconstrueing whether on purpose or by ignorance or bias. You never once said points were the only way to evaluate a player and You didn't really imply it either. It was a discussion about lack of experience and you used stats effectively to show the effect inexperience could have. Yet somehow he pulls something completely wrong out of it...and he's done it multiple times on this page of the thread alone. It's like OK have your opinion but if you're going to go nuts debating it at least use sense and logic instead of subjectivity and nonsense.

JimmyStart* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2011, 08:29 AM
  #198
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
 
haohmaru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Fleming Island, Fl
Country: United States
Posts: 6,731
vCash: 500
And, one more thing on Tom Renney (who, as I've said before, I liked as coach but felt like his time was at its end with the NYR):

In 2009-10, the Edmonton Oilers had the worst season in their history (27-47-8 for 62 points) and hired Tom Renney for the 2010-11 campaign. Since 2007, the Oilers have had 8 1st round draft picks including the 1st overall pick twice and four of the 8 were drafted in the top 10. Renney proceeded to even worse record of 25-45-12 last year with a decidedly young team (the only team younger than the Rangers this year). Did he forget how to coach all of a sudden, or is it more likely that he's had to deal with a slew of young players like Tortorella?

Sometimes you have to evaluate a coach by what he's given to work with.

haohmaru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2011, 08:41 AM
  #199
ruckus*
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 3,554
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfgaze View Post
You said the performances were "more than formidable"... I informed you that Anisimov was one of our top 2 centers and pointed out his inexperience (along with Stepan's)... 1 point in 5 games from one of our top 2 centers is a "more than formidable" performance by our standards? In a series that the Rangers lost? I watched every game of the series.... AA wasn't bad or awful, but he wasn't great, terrific, or solid either.... No one ever said points were the only way to judge the players, but 1 goal in 5 games and only 1 point, is not an acceptable performance from a top center on your team if you are hoping to advance in the playoffs, now is it? Which proves my point... The team was way too young and inexperienced to do any damage in the playoffs...

It always amazes me how you manage to misconstrue simple points people are making, which results in never-ending arguments. As evidenced with the exchange above with Vito... If you need clarification on a point someone is making, ask them...
I just don't think it's fair to only use points to assess their play over such a small sample size. My comment is based on how he looked out there over that stretch, and not just him but all the young players.

This team has failed miserably under Torts in the playoffs because of the power play. Something he was supposed to fix when he got here but we're still waiting for.

My subjective opinion of how I felt they played from watching them isn't proof of anything, but neither is this assertion that they were too young and inexperienced and that was their undoing.


Quote:
Originally Posted by haohmaru View Post
Really? Renney had 44 wins, which you so graciously pointed out, when Jagr had 123 points. No? Look it up.

Now, if we're measuring playoff success, Renney's best result came in the following 2 years where Jagr had 26 points in 20 playoff games. Which year that he made it to the 2nd round do you consider the "best"?

(Edit) Besides, my argument was that Jagr took the team on his back during the playoffs and that lead to the Rangers success in the playoffs. I don't know what 71 points has to do with anything.



How many points did Gaborik have in those 5 playoff games again? Oh, yeah, it was 2. Was that comparable to Jagr?

While we're at it - are you seriously comparing one of the all time greatest players to ever play in this league as roughly equal to Gaborik? Seriously?



Penner had 32 and he didn't make it. But, the above is a pretty random stat, and the scoring dropped off quite dramatically after Gaborik.



44 Wins disputes that. Making the playoffs last year after not making it the year before disputes that.


When you're changing a philosophy and developing a young team results are the goal at least 3 years down the road. Impatience often kills that.
I interpreted your point as saying that Renney's success was directly tied to an insane year from Jagr, and yes that had a big part of it in 05-06. But you made it sound like that's the reason Renney got where he did, which is why I pointed out that his best season was actually when we were seven seconds away from being one game shy of the Conference Finals. Jagr had a bad year by his standards.

I don't really get comparing it to Gaborik in the playoffs. If we played more than 20 playoff games I'm pretty sure that he would have more than 2 points. Would he have 26? I'd say no, but it's impossible to say.

I'm not comparing Gaborik and Jagr in any other sense than the one we were discussing. You asked me a question of when has John Tortorella ever had a player that had a season like Jagr. I disputed that comment by explaining to you that the best year Renney had here was when Jagr only scored 25 goals, and that Torts had Gabby who scored 40+ and had over 80 points and couldn't get this team to the playoffs. That was the comparison, nothing more, nothing less.

I agree it's a random stat, but you're the one who tried using the one about Jagr to try and make it seem like that's the only reason why Renney did anything, and how Torts hasn't had that luxury.

44 wins doesn't dispute anything when the guy who you replaced did the same, and had more points the year he did it.

Missing the playoffs proves regression, when the guy you replaced made it the previous four seasons before you took over for him.

If you want to say the team improved from two season ago to last season that's fine. But if we're looking at the bigger picture of results it's not possible to say the results have improved during his tenure.

The changing philosophy I understand, but that's another debate. This whole hard working/forechecking/grind it out type deal is something that isn't too difficult to come up with or stress. It's not some sort of genius tactic.

What I'd like to know, for the sake of conversation, is what exactly is Torts' system? We still have no idea after all this time. I know, I know, I know there will be 10 million people who chime in and comment as if it's an obvious fact what he does, but it's not.

When Torts got here he preached safe is death and realized right away that we were screwed. Since then, I have no idea what this team's approach is consistently.

I like the direction of the organization and it's something I give Torts credit for ALONG with the rest of the parties involved. The people who act like he's the one responsible for this drive me crazy, cause he was brought in AFTER it had already started. Do I doubt that Sather thought he was the right man for this job? Of course not. But let's not act like he rode in on his white horse and came to save the day. This organization would be on this path regardless of whether or not Torts was here.





Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos View Post
The thing I find funny about people complaining about the results of the last two years is this:

When both seasons began, what did almost all of us predict? A 7-10 finish and likely first round exit. Where did we finish? 9th, 8th with a first round exit, 7th with a first round exit (I actually don't consider the 7th place finish part of his resume here, it wasn't really his team) . In other words, Tortorella's teams have met our expectations while changing the identity of the team and the makeup of the roster in terms of youth/vet mix. Why haven't we seen more improvement? Look at the GM for that one, not the coach (we don't need to get into Sather in this thread). The coach's job is to maximize the team's ability. If somehow they overachieve, that's a bonus, not a requirement.

Some of you expect more out of your coaches. I just think it's ridiculous to criticize a guy's results when all he's done is meet expectations.
Your opinion makes it sound like you don't put any value in a head coach. Is that your feeling?

I think that a coach is overrated in any sport, but the good ones make a difference, as do the bad ones.

My expectations since Torts has been here have been to make the playoffs, something he failed at his first year here after we were there every year since the lockout, and then when we get there I expect to find a way to win.

I understand the opposing argument of people thinking the Washington Capitals were this team of God's on ice that were unbeatable by our weak little Rangers, but I don't agree with that.

In fact, I think if we don't choke away a 3-0 lead in the third period of Game 4 that we win that series.

That's how the playoffs work. This isn't the NBA. Games are decided by one goal. Special teams are key. Any team can beat any team, and as a series develops you can throw everything out the window. That's when a coach can make a difference big time.

ruckus* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2011, 08:53 AM
  #200
ruckus*
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 3,554
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyStart View Post
The bolded is the problem here with a lot of people. Misconstrueing whether on purpose or by ignorance or bias. You never once said points were the only way to evaluate a player and You didn't really imply it either. It was a discussion about lack of experience and you used stats effectively to show the effect inexperience could have. Yet somehow he pulls something completely wrong out of it...and he's done it multiple times on this page of the thread alone. It's like OK have your opinion but if you're going to go nuts debating it at least use sense and logic instead of subjectivity and nonsense.
So if someone says this...

"If you expected the Rangers to advance through the playoffs last season without their best forward (Callahan) and with 3 inexperienced rookies playing significant roles on the roster, I don't know what to tell you.... Anisimov had 1 point in the 5 games, quite the formidable playoff performance for a top 6 forward?"

And the only thing they commented on in regards to the player is point production, I'm the one who is misconstruing something?

Was there some other analysis that I missed, or was that verbatim what was said?

What exactly did I pull out of that that was completely wrong?

And for what it's worth...that's why my NEXT freaking question was asking about points and whether or not that was how he assessed the player entirely?

Did I or did I not ask that next?

So again, where did I misconstrue anything?


If you guys don't like the stuff that I write on here than feel free to block me. It's not like I care. You guys can sit here and have your politically correct conversations where you all pat each other on the back and tell each other just how great their opinions and comments are. I'm not going to worry about you guys getting upset and having your feelings hurt cause you don't like the way that I say something or how you perceive I'm saying it. It doesn't really matter.

I'm going nuts debating things? Isn't this a message board? What am I supposed to do? Flirt with you guys? Where am I going nuts?

Sense and logic? What about facts? I'm pretty sure that I use plenty of those regularly. You just said use sense and logic instead of being subjective. You do realize those ARE subjective, right?

ruckus* is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 07:31 AM.

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.