HFBoards

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

McGill's players

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-17-2005, 10:11 AM
  #26
Tawnos
Moderator
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 10,035
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
So either Moore, Ortmeyer, Betts, Hollweg and Tyutin either all were born with the proper attitude (work ethic and such) and instinctively knew and understood how to play the positional game properly OR none had any clue whatsoever and miraculously learned it all from Renney during this preaseason? Wow, that's amazing.
It's ok to like Renney and what he is doing, people, while still giving credit to those that helped the development of the players you are now loving. To simply blow off McGill's contributions is a tad short-sighted.
I'm not blowing off his contributions. We're talking about work ethic and being defensibly responsible, right? McGill taught none of those players either of those things. Did he teach Hollweg how to play the professional game? I'd have to say yes. Did he teach Hollweg to backcheck and work hard? I'd have to say no. Simple as that.

Tawnos is online now  
Old
10-17-2005, 10:19 AM
  #27
ATLANTARANGER*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Atlanta, B&R in NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 3,649
vCash: 500
Maybe, a little, but the real credit belongs to

Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
Say what you want about McGill, but the players that he coached are all prepared to play hard seemingly every shift. All the forwards backchecked as if it was drilled into them 24/7. They do not abandon their defense at all. Body positioning is always on display. And, the biggest thing of all, they all hustle. Think McGill has had anything to do with that? They are not the most talented bunch, but they work their tails off to get results.
Renney and dare I say it, Sather. They either drafted or signed the players you are talking about. It's OK for you to give credit where it is due.

ATLANTARANGER* is offline  
Old
10-17-2005, 10:25 AM
  #28
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 20,486
vCash: 500
Renney gets credit for exactly what...

at this point? Just curious what the thought there was.

Fletch is offline  
Old
10-17-2005, 10:27 AM
  #29
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 14,669
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ATLANTARANGER
Renney and dare I say it, Sather. They either drafted or signed the players you are talking about. It's OK for you to give credit where it is due.
You are telling me that the real credit for the way that these guys play belongs with Renney and Sather. So again, it is due to those two that Betts, Ortmeyer, Holllweg, Moore & Tyutin played so well last year and this year? They are the ones who taught the forwards not to abandon the defensemen and to clear the puck using the boards instead of open ice? It was Renney and Sather who taught them how to play hard every shift? They are the ones who taught them about proper body positioning? Simply amazing. McGill must have been in Hartford strickly to stunt Balej's growth. Did Sather also invent the internet?

True Blue is offline  
Old
10-17-2005, 10:30 AM
  #30
Tawnos
Moderator
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 10,035
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch
at this point? Just curious what the thought there was.
Renney should get credit for taking these guys and molding them into a team. Simple as that. I'm not ready to give Sather any credit yet. If the league continues to be in this style of play, Sather is going to look like a genius. If it becomes more physical, the team will wilt in the wind and Sather will continue to look exactly the same as he has for his Rangers tenure.

Tawnos is online now  
Old
10-17-2005, 10:30 AM
  #31
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 14,669
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos
I'm not blowing off his contributions. We're talking about work ethic and being defensibly responsible, right? McGill taught none of those players either of those things. Did he teach Hollweg how to play the professional game? I'd have to say yes. Did he teach Hollweg to backcheck and work hard? I'd have to say no.
It's posts like this that simply make me scratch my head. I guess that McGill was simply scratching he arse in Hartford whle his team won the Calder Cup. Harford's very good special teams must have arrived when Renney and Sather subliminally projected the thoughts into the players heads, while McGill tried his dardnest to figure out a way to stunt out prospects growth.
Hollweg must have picked up the knowledge of proper backchecking before he got to Hartford, becuase there's simply just no way that a coach who has nothing to do with Sather could have had a hand in their development.

True Blue is offline  
Old
10-17-2005, 10:33 AM
  #32
Tawnos
Moderator
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 10,035
vCash: 500
Enough of your sarcasm. I said McGill taught Hollweg how to play the pro game... doesn't that include "proper" backchecking? I said that Hollweg already backchecked and worked hard. Read and comprehend.

Tawnos is online now  
Old
10-17-2005, 10:33 AM
  #33
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 14,669
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos
Renney should get credit for taking these guys and molding them into a team. Simple as that.
I know. It was really Renney that spent all that time in Hartford fending off the evil McGill and his bad coaching.

"I'm not ready to give Sather any credit yet. If the league continues to be in this style of play, Sather is going to look like a genius. If it becomes more physical, the team will wilt in the wind and Sather will continue to look exactly the same as he has for his Rangers tenure."

You do realize that other teams do hit and play physical, right? It's just the Rangers that do not. Your "style" of play argument losses steam when you realize that hitting is still going on in other games. And eventually, the toll of being pounded every night will take place.

True Blue is offline  
Old
10-17-2005, 10:36 AM
  #34
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 14,669
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos
Enough of your sarcasm. I said McGill taught Hollweg how to play the pro game... doesn't that include "proper" backchecking? I said that Hollweg already backchecked and worked hard. Read and comprehend.
"We're talking about work ethic and being defensibly responsible, right? McGill taught none of those players either of those things. Did he teach Hollweg how to play the professional game? I'd have to say yes. Did he teach Hollweg to backcheck and work hard? I'd have to say no. Simple as that."

And I need to read and comprehend???? Which is it here? You are contradicting yourself from post to post.

True Blue is offline  
Old
10-17-2005, 10:56 AM
  #35
Tawnos
Moderator
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 10,035
vCash: 500
Backchecking is not the same as backchecking properly in the pro game.

Others do hit and play physical? Then why haven't they really done that against the Rangers yet?

Tawnos is online now  
Old
10-17-2005, 10:57 AM
  #36
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 29,342
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos
Backchecking is not the same as backchecking properly in the pro game.

Others do hit and play physical? Then why haven't they really done that against the Rangers yet?

ATL was hitting against the Rangers. The Rangers scored a few goals and then the Thrashers wilted. But when they were hitting they were carrying the play.

SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline  
Old
10-17-2005, 11:00 AM
  #37
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 14,669
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos
Backchecking is not the same as backchecking properly in the pro game.
Ahhh.... I see. So McGill taught him how to backcheck, just not correctly? Well thank goodness we got the proper people teaching them now, eh? It was secretly Renney that taught teh 'Pack the "proper" way to backcheck when their PK was one of the best in the AHL and they won the Calder Cup.

"Others do hit and play physical? Then why haven't they really done that against the Rangers yet?"

You must be wathching different games. The Rangers have been outhit (by far) in each and every game this season. Jagr takes a HUGE hit at least once every single game. Or did you forget that it was such a hit that caused the turnover that led to the goal against w/ .2 seconds to go in Washington?

True Blue is offline  
Old
10-17-2005, 11:15 AM
  #38
Tawnos
Moderator
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 10,035
vCash: 500
I missed the Washington game. And this is my point about reading comprehension. Hollweg already backchecked, it was McGill who taught him to properly backcheck in the pro game. On rereading my posts, this is very clear. Read them again without your defense mechanisms on and you'll see that.

Tawnos is online now  
Old
10-17-2005, 11:25 AM
  #39
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 16,679
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
You do realize that other teams do hit and play physical, right? It's just the Rangers that do not. Your "style" of play argument losses steam when you realize that hitting is still going on in other games. And eventually, the toll of being pounded every night will take place.
This quote pretty much kills your theory True Blue. Put Nylander, Straka, Rucinsky, Jagr, Rucchin and Marcel Hossa on any other team in the league and I am 100% sure they wouldn't deliver one more check then they do in NY. Have nothing to do with Renney. Why? Because thats their style of play. I am pretty sure Hollweg would play the same style no matter who is his coach, McGill/Sather/Mohatma Gahndi/Tom Renney/Mother Theresa.

Take a guy like Betts who works as hard as anyone and basically haven't played at all under McGill is also a good example.

The bottomline is that in the end I am afraid that McGill created allot more harm to the organization then good. Craig Weller is the only player in the organzation who there is no doubt about that he thrived under McGill. Look at a game with HFD and you will see that the players who are left there after McGill really have allot of problems handling the game. They don't have a clue what to do with the puck and when. Obviously McGill never thaught anyone how to play the game, or even worse thaugt the players not to think when they play the game, just skate, skate, skate... Giroux who was actually was a decent prospect when he arrived is now one of the worst player I've ever seen in the organzation.

Ola is offline  
Old
10-17-2005, 11:37 AM
  #40
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 14,669
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos
I missed the Washington game. And this is my point about reading comprehension. Hollweg already backchecked, it was McGill who taught him to properly backcheck in the pro game. On rereading my posts, this is very clear. Read them again without your defense mechanisms on and you'll see that.
Ok, is it WAS McGill who taught him how to properly backcheck? Just making sure. You seem to change your mind from post to post. And, just curious, if it was McGill that taught him to how to properly backcheck, then why would you say things like this:

"Did he teach Hollweg to backcheck and work hard? I'd have to say no. Simple as that."

So how can you say that McGill did not teach him how to backcheck and work hard, and then come back and say that he (McGill) indeed did teach him how to backcheck? Which is it? You contradict yourself with every post. Simple as that.

True Blue is offline  
Old
10-17-2005, 11:41 AM
  #41
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 20,486
vCash: 500
Tawnos...

FYI...the post to AtlantaRanger in regards to credit wasn't meant as a knock or a joke, it was along the lines that I needed specifics to reply to the post if I were to do wo.

I give credit to Renney for putting together this team through the first six games in which this team has three wins, and has lost three times. It is six games. They can get better, they can get worse, or other teams can get together. Measuring the first 10 or so games is tough. Most teams have had significant roster changes. Most teams did not have a significant amount of players play together last season. Teams, coaches and players, are getting used to new rule changes, new players, new coaches, etc. Players are getting used to playing again and getting back into shape. That takes time. Renney's ahead of the curve. But will the Rangers be smart, and are they talented enough to stay ahead of the curve? Will they still look like they're playing as a team if the Flyers come back and are all healthy and ready to go, or will it be the firedrill again and all those little things they're doing right, go wrong because the tempo's cranked up another notch. And when the big defensemen get their timing back - will that hurt the smallish forwards? This team hasn't had an injury yet either, so one needs to question how that will be dealt with

I cannot answer those questions yet. Through six, I'm pleasantly surprised, especially when compared to other teams throughout the league. I'm happy with Renney's ability to analyze what's going on out there - a signficant departure from past coaches, especially Sather. I'm looking forward to the next 76 games.

Fletch is offline  
Old
10-17-2005, 11:42 AM
  #42
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 20,486
vCash: 500
TB and tawnos...

you're both in agreement...it's semantics you're dealing with...

Fletch is offline  
Old
10-17-2005, 11:47 AM
  #43
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 14,669
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ola
This quote pretty much kills your theory True Blue. Put Nylander, Straka, Rucinsky, Jagr, Rucchin and Marcel Hossa on any other team in the league and I am 100% sure they wouldn't deliver one more check then they do in NY. Have nothing to do with Renney. Why? Because thats their style of play. I am pretty sure Hollweg would play the same style no matter who is his coach, McGill/Sather/Mohatma Gahndi/Tom Renney/Mother Theresa.
What does that have to do with anything? I have no idea of how this kills my theory? What theory is that? That McGill deserves at least some credit for doing something more than just stunting prospects growth? Sure, Hollweg would have been a physical player no matter who his coach is. So? Playing physical is not what I am talking about. I am talking about a very good work ethic, defensive responsibility and accountability. And no, if Sather or Mother Theresa were to coach these guys, I am pretty sure that defensive responsibilities like not abandoning your defensemen and backchecking, as well as proper positioning, would not have been on their to-do list. There are some things that coaching takes credit for and those are some of them, IMO.

"Take a guy like Betts who works as hard as anyone and basically haven't played at all under McGill is also a good example."

Ok, then you also have Moore, Ortmeyer & Hollweg. They certainly played a good amount of their profesional careers underneath McGill.

"The bottomline is that in the end I am afraid that McGill created allot more harm to the organization then good. Craig Weller is the only player in the organzation who there is no doubt about that he thrived under McGill."

I competely and utterly disagree. Players that I have talked about were not born with the proper knowledge and, like it or not, it WAS McGill who coached them for two years. You cannot just shurg that off to suit your needs. You don't want to give him any credit, that's fine. But someone had to teach them. ANY Hartford callup last year looked more prepared to play than the vets with the big club.

"Look at a game with HFD and you will see that the players who are left there after McGill really have allot of problems handling the game. They don't have a clue what to do with the puck and when."

Oh, I disagree. I watched enough 'Pack games last year to see what a properly prepared team looks like. They knew what to do with the puck. It's called do not send it through center ice like the big club does. The 'Packs great defensive play and PK was not becuase they have no idea of what to do with the puck.

"Obviously McGill never thaught anyone how to play the game, or even worse thaugt the players not to think when they play the game, just skate, skate, skate... "

Again, then how do you explain the fact that every single callup from Hartford over the last 2 years never looked out of place or not prepared? Osmosis?

"Giroux who was actually was a decent prospect when he arrived is now one of the worst player I've ever seen in the organzation."

And, yet, somehow he had his finest year under McGill.

True Blue is offline  
Old
10-17-2005, 01:32 PM
  #44
Kodiak
Registered User
 
Kodiak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Ranger fan in Philly
Posts: 2,185
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Kodiak Send a message via AIM to Kodiak Send a message via Yahoo to Kodiak
TB, I think you're overstating McGill's impact. No one, except a few die hard Satherites, is disputing that McGill was at least a competent coach. As a competent coach, he should have improved the defensive awareness of the players as they adjusted to the professional level. But the problem was that he wasn't developing the offensive side. So while he was competent, he wasn't right for the organization.

As for teaching the kids to work hard, I think you could have said that last year after the trading deadline. Then, we saw a bunch of players from Hartford play hard and play within a system while the players with the Rangers before looked disinterested and unorganized. If it were still like this, I would agree with you. But now, everyone is playing hard and I'd say that is more due to Renney than McGill at this point. Renney has got this team on the same page and working for the team instead of the individual. I wasn't a big fan of Renney in the offseason either, but I don't think you're giving him enough credit, if any, for the job he's done early on.

Kodiak is offline  
Old
10-17-2005, 01:43 PM
  #45
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 14,669
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kodiak
I wasn't a big fan of Renney in the offseason either, but I don't think you're giving him enough credit, if any, for the job he's done early on.
On this point, don't get me wrong. As an acknowledged skeptic of Renney, I have actually given him credit for some of the things that he has both said and done so far. For the first time in 8 years, there is a sense of responsibility amongst the players and there actually seems to be a system at work that the players are either adhering to or are finding themselves on the bench. I fully commend him for those. I have stated these things in various threads. So it's not like I am not giving credit where credit is due. Very (and I mean very sloooooooowly) I am warming up to Renney.
Where I do not give him full credit for is the belief that players like Ortmeyer, Moore, Tyutin, Hollweg & Betts owe him 100% for their development. I feel that it is there that McGill gets a bad rap. Yes, Renney will develop them from this point on in. And I will even add that you can see some growth from the preseason to now. However, it was McGill who started the development in the past two years. All the good work habits that were already there when Renney got a hold of them, have already been drilled into their heads by McGill.

"But the problem was that he wasn't developing the offensive side. So while he was competent, he wasn't right for the organization."

This I also question. Ok, is it his fault that Lundmark regressed and Balej was not interested in playing? I do not see Renney having any type of visible impact on Jaime.
MCgill did not have very many offensive minded players in Hartford. He did not have Immonen, Graham, Jessiman, or Dawes. He had to rely on people like Giroux, who had his finest season under McGill.

True Blue is offline  
Old
10-17-2005, 01:50 PM
  #46
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 20,486
vCash: 500
Taking the other side, Kodiak...

what offensize side was there? Balej's gone because it may've become obvious that he wasn't as talented as originally thought. You don't trade him away because he had a bad coach for a year if you believe something's there. Murray seemed to not have a lot of offensive talent. Moore's nice, but what's his real offensive potential in the pros? He's small and not that talented offensively - he did improve year over year, but the argument may be that's because of the small base - but maybe he's just not offensively talented at this level. He works hard and has good speed. Giroux did improve offensively. Lundmark's sitting on the bench, likely not because McGill crushed him.

I don't know - the team didn't exactly have a lot of offensive talent - and perhaps that's why McGill's team played the defensive-oriented style it played - trying to make the organization into the same as the Devils, where players in the AHL can easily be put into NHL situations and fit in. While we'd love to see players develop to their fullest extent, the other job an AHL coach is to ready a player for an NHL position. I don't know - sometimes I think the talent on this team may've been overstated. On another note - another win for Labarbera - and he's actually starting to look like an NHL goalie. That could change, but it's nice to see for him.

As I had stated earlier, I get the sense, although not totally substantiated, that there may've been more to McGill's dismissal. And of course, just because Sather, or Maloney, or Schoenfeld states the reason why he was let go, it doesn't mean they're right.

Fletch is offline  
Old
10-17-2005, 01:51 PM
  #47
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 20,486
vCash: 500
On a similar note...

anybody know where the 'Pack ranked in terms of goals scored per game?

Fletch is offline  
Old
10-17-2005, 02:36 PM
  #48
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 16,679
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
"Look at a game with HFD and you will see that the players who are left there after McGill really have allot of problems handling the game. They don't have a clue what to do with the puck and when."

Oh, I disagree. I watched enough 'Pack games last year to see what a properly prepared team looks like. They knew what to do with the puck. It's called do not send it through center ice like the big club does. The 'Packs great defensive play and PK was not becuase they have no idea of what to do with the puck.
Look at a game this year. "McGill's guys" looks really out of place on a team where they are expected to move the puck...

McGill implemented a system in HFD that took Calgary to the Stanley Cup finals and Anaheim to the Stanley Cup Finals. I agree, the Pack great defensive play was not because they didn't know what to do with the puck. McGill made sure they knew what to do with the puck 100 out of 100 times. Lift it away from danger. Its not a enviorment that is very healty for a young hockeyplayer. I am not saying McGill is a idiot or a poor coach. He is just a scum bag who soldout NYR to try to make a name for himself...

Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
"Obviously McGill never thaught anyone how to play the game, or even worse thaugt the players not to think when they play the game, just skate, skate, skate... "

Again, then how do you explain the fact that every single callup from Hartford over the last 2 years never looked out of place or not prepared? Osmosis?
Not out of place? Besides Moore who had developt into a decent two way player, much of it because of his improved skating though that he picked up during the summer, our skilled players have looked terrible in NY. Still I give you Moore. But Balej, Lundmark and Giroux have very much "looked out of place" so far after a year with magic man McGill.

Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
"Giroux who was actually was a decent prospect when he arrived is now one of the worst player I've ever seen in the organzation."

And, yet, somehow he had his finest year under McGill.
Giroux actually had a better point per game total in Binghampton his last year then he had in HFD... The only reason people refer to him as having a great year is because everyone around him sucked even worse. 32 goals and 50 points in the AHL for christ sake. Pretty much sums it up how successful McGill was at developing players.

Ola is offline  
Old
10-17-2005, 03:20 PM
  #49
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 20,486
vCash: 500
Ola...

isn't that the type of thinking that made the River Rats, and ultimately the Devils successful? Emphasis on defense and playing a smart game, in addition to creating chances from aggressive forecheck and speed to capitalize on opponents' mistakes? And out of that some offensive guys were borne, but that's because they were talented offensive guys. My question is, who were the offensive power houses the Rangers had the last year, or three (it took Sather three years to find out McGill wasn't properly nurturing these guys?)?

Fletch is offline  
Old
10-17-2005, 03:22 PM
  #50
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 20,486
vCash: 500
Ola...

Giroux averaged a goal every .41 games last season compared to every .32 per game in Binghampton. Points per game? He's a goal scorer, I'm not concerned with others inability to score.

Fletch is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

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

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



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:57 AM.

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.