HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Notices

John Tortorella

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-14-2011, 10:41 AM
  #201
Tawnos
Moderator
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 10,032
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruckus View Post
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.
Umm, how does saying you shouldn't criticize a guy for meeting expectations equal saying a coach doesn't matter?

You and I have difference definitions of expectations. Your version is what you want the team to do. Mine is where I realistically feel the team sits in the league in terms of it's roster. Yeah, the team missed the playoffs in 2010. Did that really come as a surprise? Was it really outside of the realm of expectations? If it did come as a surprise, you really need to change the way you evaluate lineups. (btw, my expectation for this season is that we move up into the middle playoff teams... 4-6. This has nothing to do with John Tortorella). And also, it is possible to change what you expect. If Staal is out for half the season, my expectations for this team will change.

What you're talking about with the playoffs is not "finding a way to win". It's completely unrealistic to count on a team pulling off an upset against a superior opponent. If you do pull it off, that falls into the realm of "overachieving", which, as I said earlier, is a bonus. It has nothing to do with Washington being a "team of gods", but rather with the fact that Washington was clearly a superior team. If we had played any of the teams in the East playoffs except for Buffalo or Montreal, any expectation of a series win is ridiculous. Based on what you're saying with that, I really don't think the problem here is with Tortorella, but with your own sense of reality.

Of course a coach can make a difference, but there are only the very, very rare instances in hockey where coaches make teams greater than the sum of their parts. Those guys get nominated for the Adams, and having that happen over a long season requires a fair bit of luck on top. Usually, the difference that coach makes is ensuring that the team doesn't underachieve, which they certainly would with no coaching at all.

Tawnos is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2011, 10:47 AM
  #202
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 13,288
vCash: 500
Renney and Torts were/are both adequate coaches. I dont think either one massively over or underachieved with the teams they were given during their tenures here.

The inconvenient truth is that their teams just havent been very good.

I think we can all agree that, top to bottom, this should be the best NYR team since the mid-late 90's, so we'll see what happens. If Tortorella fails to make the playoffs, or has a dismal showing in the first round, it'll be a disappointment.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2011, 11:34 AM
  #203
wolfgaze
Interesting Cat
 
wolfgaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 11,981
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.
Thank you Jimmy... You are correct that I never said anything about points being the only way to evaluate a player, I was pointing out our deficiencies in the depth & experience department in highlighting that our supposed top 2 centers combined for just 1 goal and 1 point in 5 games... Overall, our 4 centers combined for 2 goals in 5 games against the Caps, they had 0 assists... Unless we're blessed with drafting players like Crosby & Malkin, fielding a playoff line-up where your top 2 centers had/have a combined 3 seasons NHL experience is never going to hack it in the playoffs, and that's what I was trying to point out... No amount of coaching is going to compensate for that type of handicap.... Fielding a 2nd d-man pairing of 2 inexperienced rookies did not help either, regardless of how they performed during the regular season... Teams with veteran players who have been through the process many times before, will always have that added advantage that experience brings, plus their games are obviously more refined, whereas younger players are still growing & developing.


Last edited by wolfgaze: 10-14-2011 at 11:53 AM.
wolfgaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2011, 01:59 PM
  #204
JimmyStart*
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,569
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruckus View Post
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?
for the answer to this bolded question merely look back at my post that you quoted. it';s pretty clearly explained how you took the obvious point and the obvious reasoning behind the point and missed it utterly. Now you missed my clear explanation of the above question. Also when you cant look past verbatim to see and understand the very obvious point being made thats kinda misconstrueing the words.

Sounds like your paranoid as hell. It;s less me patting wolfgaze on the back and more the fact that you're clueless and I'm criticizing you for it. Sounds like you're getting frustrated and trying to push me to block you. Why would I be frustrated? You're the one getting ganged up on and told how bad your use of "facts" are not me.

Facts are used to come to sensible and logical conclusions...you on the other hand are using poor facts, and giving us misconstrued opinion based on poor fact and several flat out inaccuracies to push the same tired whining on us over and over throughout every thread on HF. When you make good points and god forbid original points people will agree with you. When you make the same bad points over and over and over then people will tell you how bad your points are. As far as going nuts is concerned boy are you really reacting to that. One might say you're continueing to go nuts about it.

JimmyStart* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2011, 03:25 PM
  #205
ruckus*
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 3,554
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos View Post
Umm, how does saying you shouldn't criticize a guy for meeting expectations equal saying a coach doesn't matter?

You and I have difference definitions of expectations. Your version is what you want the team to do. Mine is where I realistically feel the team sits in the league in terms of it's roster. Yeah, the team missed the playoffs in 2010. Did that really come as a surprise? Was it really outside of the realm of expectations? If it did come as a surprise, you really need to change the way you evaluate lineups. (btw, my expectation for this season is that we move up into the middle playoff teams... 4-6. This has nothing to do with John Tortorella). And also, it is possible to change what you expect. If Staal is out for half the season, my expectations for this team will change.

What you're talking about with the playoffs is not "finding a way to win". It's completely unrealistic to count on a team pulling off an upset against a superior opponent. If you do pull it off, that falls into the realm of "overachieving", which, as I said earlier, is a bonus. It has nothing to do with Washington being a "team of gods", but rather with the fact that Washington was clearly a superior team. If we had played any of the teams in the East playoffs except for Buffalo or Montreal, any expectation of a series win is ridiculous. Based on what you're saying with that, I really don't think the problem here is with Tortorella, but with your own sense of reality.

Of course a coach can make a difference, but there are only the very, very rare instances in hockey where coaches make teams greater than the sum of their parts. Those guys get nominated for the Adams, and having that happen over a long season requires a fair bit of luck on top. Usually, the difference that coach makes is ensuring that the team doesn't underachieve, which they certainly would with no coaching at all.

Look at what you just said...you said you believe the team is 4-6 and that has nothing to do with Tortorella.

So what value do you place in the coach then? What is the point of replacing him? Why was Renney ever replaced?

Your expectations are fine, you're entitled to them. And you can judge the coach that you don't think has much to do with those expectations based on them if you please.

I use something that we can actually look at, which are results.

Because those aren't based on one person's belief of what they think should happen, because those can be entirely different.


Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyStart View Post
for the answer to this bolded question merely look back at my post that you quoted. it';s pretty clearly explained how you took the obvious point and the obvious reasoning behind the point and missed it utterly. Now you missed my clear explanation of the above question. Also when you cant look past verbatim to see and understand the very obvious point being made thats kinda misconstrueing the words.

Sounds like your paranoid as hell. It;s less me patting wolfgaze on the back and more the fact that you're clueless and I'm criticizing you for it. Sounds like you're getting frustrated and trying to push me to block you. Why would I be frustrated? You're the one getting ganged up on and told how bad your use of "facts" are not me.

Facts are used to come to sensible and logical conclusions...you on the other hand are using poor facts, and giving us misconstrued opinion based on poor fact and several flat out inaccuracies to push the same tired whining on us over and over throughout every thread on HF. When you make good points and god forbid original points people will agree with you. When you make the same bad points over and over and over then people will tell you how bad your points are. As far as going nuts is concerned boy are you really reacting to that. One might say you're continueing to go nuts about it.

So break my argument. Instead of talking about how I'm not providing anything, why don't you take what I have provided and defeat the argument.


Renney:

05-06 100 pts swept in first round
06-07 94 pts lost in second round Pittsburgh
07-08 97 points lost in second round to Pittsburgh
08-09 69 points through 61 games before being removed

Torts:

08-09 26 points in 21 games lost in first round
09-10 87 points no playoffs
10-11 93 points lost in first round


The results are what they are. If you don't like the facts because they don't help your opinion, I don't know what to tell you.

If you don't like the way I present them, too bad.

ruckus* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2011, 04:01 PM
  #206
wolfgaze
Interesting Cat
 
wolfgaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 11,981
vCash: 500
Sigh... You think just posting the playoff records of 2 coaches who operated with entirely different personnel is all the "facts" you need to bolster your argument (whatever that is)? Try analyzing the rosters, the depth of those rosters, injury status, and looking at the strength of the opponents we faced and the same set of circumstances for those teams' rosters if you want anyone to take your argument seriously... You need to account for all of those factors first, and then analyze how the team should have been realistically expected to perform, vs. how they actually performed under those coaches, in order to evaluate or draw any conclusions about what the coaches did or did not accomplish... Instead you presented an extremely shallow argument without even attempting to break anything down in depth, and are telling others you're "right" because you posted these "facts" (playoff records?)... And you wonder why people are frustrated trying to have civil debate with you?


Last edited by wolfgaze: 10-14-2011 at 04:18 PM.
wolfgaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2011, 04:41 PM
  #207
stan the caddy
Registered User
 
stan the caddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,390
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfgaze View Post
Sigh... You think just posting the playoff records of 2 coaches who operated with entirely different personnel is all the "facts" you need to bolster your argument (whatever that is)? Try analyzing the rosters, the depth of those rosters, injury status, and looking at the strength of the opponents we faced and the same set of circumstances for those teams' rosters if you want anyone to take your argument seriously... You need to account for all of those factors first, and then analyze how the team should have been realistically expected to perform, vs. how they actually performed under those coaches, in order to evaluate or draw any conclusions about what the coaches did or did not accomplish... Instead you presented an extremely shallow argument without even attempting to break anything down in depth, and are telling others you're "right" because you posted these "facts" (playoff records?)... And you wonder why people are frustrated trying to have civil debate with you?
Well, yes those are the "facts". Talking about "expectations" is your way of coping with them.

The 2009-10 team that missed the playoffs was by far the biggest let down season we've had since the lockout. How do you analyze that team? There's no excuse for not making the playoffs. Gaborik was one of the best forwards in the league that year, we had the great goalie etc. We ended up being below average.

Torts might bring us to the promise land but when you look at his track record in NY, it's not good.

stan the caddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2011, 04:54 PM
  #208
wolfgaze
Interesting Cat
 
wolfgaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 11,981
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stan the caddy View Post
Well, yes those are the "facts". Talking about "expectations" is your way of coping with them.
Are you really that uniformed? So all we have to do is look at records and coaches and that's all the information we need to evaluate a team and a head coaches performance? Nevermind the personnel, nevermind injuries, forget about the GM who built and assembled that team, right? Give me a freakin' break... Renney's Oilers finished with a league worst 25 wins last season... Why wasn't Renney fired at the end of the season? He coached his team to the worst record in the NHL... By your standards, those are the "facts" right? That's all we need to look at.... By most informed peoples' standards, Renney was coaching one of the youngest and most inexperienced teams in the league, and he was operating with a roster that his GM built.... So while the rest of us understand the full spectrum of the circumstances and can draw conclusions based on reasonable expectations for the team in question, you and Ruckus can go analyze your "facts" and call for Renney's termination since clearly he was the worst coach in the National Hockey League last season, right? Ask yourself why Tom Renney still has a job and maybe you will understand the concept of having "reasonable expectations"....

Quote:
The 2009-10 team that missed the playoffs was by far the biggest let down season we've had since the lockout. How do you analyze that team? There's no excuse for not making the playoffs. Gaborik was one of the best forwards in the league that year, we had the great goalie etc. We ended up being below average.
And who was our #1 Center? Erik Christensen? Or 1st year rookie Artem Anisimov? Who was our #2 Center? Did you take note of our defense? Below average depth = below average results, we got what we deserved... Go complain to Sather....


Last edited by wolfgaze: 10-14-2011 at 05:00 PM.
wolfgaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2011, 04:59 PM
  #209
OverTheCap
Registered User
 
OverTheCap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 9,239
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stan the caddy View Post
Well, yes those are the "facts". Talking about "expectations" is your way of coping with them.

The 2009-10 team that missed the playoffs was by far the biggest let down season we've had since the lockout. How do you analyze that team? There's no excuse for not making the playoffs. Gaborik was one of the best forwards in the league that year, we had the great goalie etc. We ended up being below average.

Torts might bring us to the promise land but when you look at his track record in NY, it's not good.
The biggest letdown season post-lockout was 2007-08 for sure. Some fans thought that Gomez and Drury made the team legit cup contenders. Many believed that Jagr would put up monster numbers with Gomez as his center. The team was supposed to build on their playoff performance from 2007. Instead, Gomez and Drury turned out to be duds, Jagr had far more chemistry with Nylander than he ever did with Gomez, and the Rangers lost to the Pens in 5 games in the 2nd round.

I don't recall such high expectations for the 2009-10 team at all.

OverTheCap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2011, 05:03 PM
  #210
wolfgaze
Interesting Cat
 
wolfgaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 11,981
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OverTheCap View Post
The biggest letdown season post-lockout was 2007-08 for sure. Some fans thought that Gomez and Drury made the team legit cup contenders. Many believed that Jagr would put up monster numbers with Gomez as his center. The team was supposed to build on their playoff performance from 2007. Instead, Gomez and Drury turned out to be duds, Jagr had far more chemistry with Nylander than he ever did with Gomez, and the Rangers lost to the Pens in 5 games in the 2nd round.

I don't recall such high expectations for the 2009-10 team at all.
Agreed... Look at the veteran forwards we fielded up front:

Jagr
Shanahan
Gomez
Drury
Straka

wolfgaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2011, 05:07 PM
  #211
stan the caddy
Registered User
 
stan the caddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,390
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfgaze View Post
Are you really that uniformed? So all we have to do is look at records and coaches and that's all the information we need to evaluate a team and a head coaches performance? Nevermind the personnel, nevermind injuries, forget about the GM who built and assembled that team, right? Give me a freakin' break... Renney's Oilers finished with a league worst 25 wins last season... Why wasn't Renney fired at the end of the season? He coached his team to the worst record in the NHL... By your standards, those are the "facts" right? That's all we need to look at.... By most informed peoples' standards, Renney was coaching one of the youngest and most inexperienced teams in the league, and he was operating with a roster that his GM built.... So while the rest of us understand the full spectrum of the circumstances and can draw conclusions based on reasonable expectations for the team in question, you and Ruckus can go analyze your "facts" and call for Renney's termination since clearly he was the worst coach in the National Hockey League last season, right? Ask yourself why Tom Renney still has a job and maybe you will understand the concept of having "reasonable expectations"....



And who was our #1 Center? Erik Christensen? Or 1st year rookie Artem Anisimov? Who was our #2 Center? Did you take note of our defense? Below average depth = below average results, we got what we deserved... Go complain to Sather....
Prospal. IIRC Dubinsky was playing center at the time too. Oh yea, we traded for Jokinen at the deadline. Our defense was pretty damn good that year with the exception of MDZ who Torts should have sent down to the minors. You don't need an all star team to be average enough to make the playoffs. That team failed to meet regular season expectations.

All I hear from the pro-Torts fan club is, "He does a great job of developing the youth." Well, so does Bruce Boudreau but I have a sneaky feeling you wouldn't consider him a good coach.


Last edited by stan the caddy: 10-14-2011 at 05:12 PM.
stan the caddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2011, 05:11 PM
  #212
stan the caddy
Registered User
 
stan the caddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,390
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OverTheCap View Post
The biggest letdown season post-lockout was 2007-08 for sure. Some fans thought that Gomez and Drury made the team legit cup contenders. Many believed that Jagr would put up monster numbers with Gomez as his center. The team was supposed to build on their playoff performance from 2007. Instead, Gomez and Drury turned out to be duds, Jagr had far more chemistry with Nylander than he ever did with Gomez, and the Rangers lost to the Pens in 5 games in the 2nd round.

I don't recall such high expectations for the 2009-10 team at all.
I don't recall thinking we would miss the playoffs. In 2007-08 I definitely had higher expectations for the team but the finish wasn't nearly as upsetting as missing the playoffs entirely in 09.

stan the caddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2011, 05:14 PM
  #213
Tawnos
Moderator
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 10,032
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruckus View Post
Look at what you just said...you said you believe the team is 4-6 and that has nothing to do with Tortorella.
Wow... erm... how did you get that from what I said? Edit: because it's exactly what I said without context.

If the team hits 4-6, Tortorella did a fine job this year.

If the team finishes 7 or lower, Tortorella did not do a good job this year.

If the team wins the division, it would reflect extremely well on Tortorella because the team overachieved.

This is an extremely black & white way of looking at it and doesn't exactly reflect my opinion, but it's close enough. There are things that can change. If they finish 8th but Staal misses almost all of the season, I would probably wouldn't feel it reflects badly on Tortorella.

On the other hand, I don't think underachieving is a death sentence for Tortorella, but that's not the discussion we're having.

And results aren't enough to judge a coach by, because by that judgment... Tom Renney did a TERRIBLE job last year in Edmonton. Context of results matters a lot and context usually means what you expect.


Last edited by Tawnos: 10-14-2011 at 05:25 PM.
Tawnos is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2011, 05:33 PM
  #214
wolfgaze
Interesting Cat
 
wolfgaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 11,981
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stan the caddy View Post
Prospal. IIRC Dubinsky was playing center at the time too. Oh yea, we traded for Jokinen at the deadline. Our defense was pretty damn good that year with the exception of MDZ who Torts should have sent down to the minors. You don't need an all star team to be average enough to make the playoffs. That team failed to meet regular season expectations
-Redden & Rozsival were "pretty damn good" that year huh? Did we watch the same team? MDZ was played as a top 4 defenseman and finished -20 on the year..
-Did you watch Jokinen play or are you basing the impact of his addition to our roster based on his reputation with Florida? 4 goals and 15 points in 26 games, and didn't provide much of anything in the form of defensive contributions, impressive... His impact was negligible at best, and that was Sather who traded for him, not Tortorella....

Quote:
All I hear from the pro-Torts fan club is, "He does a great job of developing the youth." Well, so does Bruce Boudreau but I have a sneaky feeling you wouldn't consider him a good coach.
Please tell me what's analogous about Boudreau and Tortorella's respective teams? Do we have young players on our team on par with Ovechkin & Backstrom talent? Obviously not.... When you have world class players and under-perform in the playoffs, that's quite different than having mid-level talent to work with and performing on par with reasonable expectations, wouldn't you say?

wolfgaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2011, 05:45 PM
  #215
stan the caddy
Registered User
 
stan the caddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,390
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfgaze View Post
-Redden & Rozsival were "pretty damn good" that year huh? Did we watch the same team? MDZ was played as a top 4 defenseman and finished -20 on the year..
-Did you watch Jokinen play or are you basing the impact of his addition to our roster based on his reputation with Florida? 4 goals and 15 points in 26 games, and didn't provide much of anything in the form of defensive contributions, impressive... His impact was negligible at best, and that was Sather who traded for him, not Tortorella....



Please tell me what's analogous about Boudreau and Tortorella's respective teams? Do we have young players on our team on par with Ovechkin & Backstrom talent? Obviously not.... When you have world class players and under-perform in the playoffs, that's quite different than having mid-level talent to work with and performing on par with reasonable expectations, wouldn't you say?

That defense was led by Staal and Girardi. They allowed the 3rd fewest goals in the east. It was good enough to be average, which is all we had to be to make the playoffs.

I brought up Jokinen because you made an idiotic comment about Christensen/ Anisimov being our 1-2 centers. You obviously don't remember the team that well.

Torts gets all this credit for 'developing the youth" meanwhile every other freakin coach is doing the same thing, even Bruce Boudreau.

stan the caddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2011, 06:16 PM
  #216
Kershaw
 
Kershaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country:
Posts: 25,519
vCash: 50
I don't see much of a difference between Renney and Tortorella. One has Nikolai Khabibulin to rely on while the other has Henrik Lundqvist.

Renney was the better coach with the Rangers. He actually won a playoff round too. Not saying it's a mistake letting him go since I do agree both sides needed to move on, but I don't see how Torts is that much better.

Kershaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2011, 07:20 PM
  #217
alkurtz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Mahopac, NY
Posts: 873
vCash: 500
I think that the most important part of a coach's job is the part that we don't see: managing the group dynamics and the 23 individuals that make up a team.

In all honesty, there isn't much difference between coaches when it comes to tactics and strategy and x's and o's. Yes, there a few coaches who are head an shoulders above the rest, and there a few who are completely lost and don't last long. But everyone else falls into the middle.

There is no one way to coach: all styles and personalities have and can win. Certainly Renney and Tortorella are polar opposites in personality and approach. With the right set of players, either can win. Sports is full of cerebral coaches who have won, emotional coaches who have won, and nearly everything in between.

So, without being in the locker room and traveling with the team, what kind of job is Torts doing behind the scenes (just for honesty's sake, I much prefer a Renney type of coach). Torts has done a good job. Players have bought into his style of play and changed the way the Rangers approach games (I'm dismissing the first two games).

He seems to know what buttons to push when he plays his head games with players ( a big part of his approach but he also seems to realize that you can't play games with everyone). Cally and Dubi have both benefited by being pushed. Dubi is still being manipulated to do more. Though I don't care for his approach: he seems to be doing a good job with group dynamics. Some players are just beyond the reach of any coach: W2 and EC are hopeless.

Emotional, fiery coaches have a short shelf life. Torts is still on the upswing portion of his trajectory. The early part of the season this year would test the mettle of any coach and team. If the Rangers continue to struggle we need to cut Torts some slack (remember, I'm not a Torts guy). I don't agree with everything he does: I think he created the confusion in MDZ's head as to what kind of player he is and is somewhat responsible for his backslide. But not every coach reaches every player.

Even if the team goes backward a bit this year, even if we lose 7,8, 9 in a row (hopefully not), I will not be ready to blame Torts unless I have some sense of chaos in the locker room. Look at the stuff that has come out about the Bosox this week? Amazing. Shows that we fans never really know what is going on with our teams.

Bottom line for me is simple: though I would prefer a Renney-type coach, Torts has done a good job. Ranger management seems to believe in him. He works hard and is organized. He is as good (or bad) at tactics as most other coaches. He has a resume that includes a SC. Unless dissension tears this team apart, no matter what the teams won-lose record, we need to stay with Torts. Teams that change coaches or managers often are disfunctional.

alkurtz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2011, 02:15 AM
  #218
JimmyStart*
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,569
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfgaze View Post
Are you really that uniformed? So all we have to do is look at records and coaches and that's all the information we need to evaluate a team and a head coaches performance? Nevermind the personnel, nevermind injuries, forget about the GM who built and assembled that team, right? .
Really this perfectly sums up why I wont even waste my time anymore on guys like this. it's been said over and over yet theys till ask us to say the same exact thing and when we do they claim "Only results matter prove me wrong..." Then when proven wrong they go "Only results matter prove me wrong..." it's literally a dog chasing its tail here. Or trolling I dunno. The inability to actually evaluate hockey on anything higher than a 3rd grade level (W L record and Seeding) is apparent with these two which makes it an impossible debate to even have

JimmyStart* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2011, 01:14 PM
  #219
number72
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,836
vCash: 500
It is still early. but I'm not sure if his system makes good use of richard's talents.

number72 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2011, 01:23 PM
  #220
wolfgaze
Interesting Cat
 
wolfgaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 11,981
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by number72 View Post
It is still early. but I'm not sure if his system makes good use of richard's talents.
Who was Richards' coach the year he won a Stanley Cup and the Conn Smythe? I am pretty sure that Richards & Tortorella have a pretty good understanding of how Brad should be playing the game... They know one another and they know what works for the player.... It's not like Torts is going to step in and tell Richards he needs to start playing differently than what has already worked for him in the past.... Let's be real here.

wolfgaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2011, 01:24 PM
  #221
wolfgaze
Interesting Cat
 
wolfgaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 11,981
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyStart View Post
Really this perfectly sums up why I wont even waste my time anymore on guys like this. it's been said over and over yet theys till ask us to say the same exact thing and when we do they claim "Only results matter prove me wrong..." Then when proven wrong they go "Only results matter prove me wrong..." it's literally a dog chasing its tail here. Or trolling I dunno. The inability to actually evaluate hockey on anything higher than a 3rd grade level (W L record and Seeding) is apparent with these two which makes it an impossible debate to even have
"You can lead a horse to water...."

I guess there isn't much more left to say on the subject matter.... Neither opinion is right or wrong by itself but perspective is everything, and absent any acknowledgement of all the factors in play, you can't really have an intelligent debate about it....


Last edited by wolfgaze: 10-15-2011 at 06:53 PM.
wolfgaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2011, 09:41 PM
  #222
Machinehead
Richards Supporter
 
Machinehead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: New York New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,373
vCash: 500
The talent is there and the wins aren't. That's on the coach.

It's time for Torts to go. I never liked him and I think his system is totally outdated and doesn't work in the new NHL. And don't gimme any crap about canning the coach 3 games in. I didn't like him last year and I didn't like him the year before that.

Machinehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2011, 10:34 PM
  #223
number72
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,836
vCash: 500
I never like torts. He always seems to come up a bit short.
Right now I'm more concerned about Richards performing

number72 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2011, 11:03 PM
  #224
Draft Guru
The Wizard of Özil
 
Draft Guru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 6,569
vCash: 500


Snapped this pic tonight, thought it was priceless.

Guy took off his Avery jersey and held it above Torts' head on the glass for a good 30 seconds before security came over and told him to take it down lol

Draft Guru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-16-2011, 12:15 AM
  #225
Jabroni
Moderator
The Corporate Mod
 
Jabroni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 6,272
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by number72 View Post
I never like torts. He always seems to come up a bit short.
Right now I'm more concerned about Richards performing
Richards and Gaborik have been clicking well with each other.

They were the 2 best forwards last night.

As for Torts, I am patient and will wait for results to come.

But, if results don't come this season, the organization may have to consider a new coach.

Jabroni 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 05:32 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.