I talked about it on the show last night and I frankly see Torts around for awhile no matter how bad things get.
He is the perfect fit for the organization. He hates the media, keeps everything in house. Blames the players when the heat is on and never points the finger at the higher ups or even more importantly himself when things go wrong.
You combine that with Sather's "Youth like the Blackhawks, Be patient" mantra and the fact that he has now been welcomed in Dolan's circle of trust, I feel Torts isn't going anywhere
Only way I see him exiting is if he starts pointing fingers upstairs.
Maybe if some started pointing fingers upstairs maybe their **** would fall.
Honestly wouldn't mind tortasmella leaving eventually. Its been a coach vs team mentality since he took over; with Renney it was the opposite, they played for him and found their way into the playoffs every year.
Honestly wouldn't mind tortasmella leaving eventually. Its been a coach vs team mentality since he took over; with Renney it was the opposite, they played for him and found their way into the playoffs every year.
And just to elaborate, if the plan was to incorporate youth, then why did Sather fire the last guy?
Theres no organizational plan. None. The people that think there is are fooling themselves.
Before the last guy was fired, the NYR were on a 10g losing streak barely scoring 1-2g a game. Now I’m not saying the team was that talented, but it looked like the team quit on the last guy. I think they lost faith in his system. The last guy might have had a more patient approach with youth, but I don’t necessarily see him as
The “Coach for the youth” for the NYR.
I’m not saying that Tortorella is that coach either, but I believe they wanted to go with a guy that employs a pressure, puck pursuit system. At the moment we don’t have enough talent for him to be truly effective, but we’ll see. Torts was pretty adamant about Hank getting rest and not burning out. That to me was the X-factor last season and it has been addressed.
* i don't see how the coaching change shows duplicity regarding the direction the org. says they desire to head in?
Honestly wouldn't mind tortasmella leaving eventually. Its been a coach vs team mentality since he took over; with Renney it was the opposite, they played for him and found their way into the playoffs every year.
Quote:
Originally Posted by turcotte8
Except for the last year when they quit on him.
yea, the "they" of seasons past i would agree with, but, 09' lineup definitely quit on him.
Really going out on a limb by saying a coach is on the hot seat. How about this Burnside: name me one coach who WONT be on the hotseat if they fail to make the playoffs? And that includes Joel Quennville and Laviolette.
If you're going to hammer on Torts and/or Sather, do your homework.
The Rangers PP under Torts has been very good. A PP QB? How about Mike Del Zotto? Ask Gaborik how many of his PP goals were off of tape-to-tape passes by Del Zotto, or rushes from end top end that help set plays up?
The end result? rangers finished 13th in the league on the PP -- their best finish since 2007 (and after finishing 29th in 2009) when they had Nylander, who at the time was the true PP QB. Anybody who doesnt think MDZ wont be QB'ing our power play for at least the next 5 years doesnt know what a PP QB looks like.
As far as a No. 1 center, what's the rush? I'm sure Burnside would be tickled if Sather traded Stepan and Grachev for Richards, only to have Richards become a 7-plus million dollar bust. Sather went out two years ago and acquired two possible No. 1 centers in Gomez and Drury. Drury is obviously overpaid, but that marks three teams in five years in which Gomez was a No. 1 center. It's not like Sather hasn't made an effort to address needs, which is what Burnside is implying.
Gaborik is 28 and low maintenance, so I can deal with Dubinsky or Stepan developing a little more into a No. 1 rather than trade or sign for one.
Sure, it would be nice if he had Joe Thornton or Marc Savard. But hats off to Sather for not breaking the bank and mortgaging the future just so he can make a tool like Burnside "happy" for about a week in the offseason.
It's also funny how Burnside omits that Sather went out and addressed the most pressing need in the organization by acquiring Boogaard and McIlrath, and resigning Prust
The Rangers are obviously going to have to scratch and claw to get into the playoffs, but I think Burnside's assessment is pretty lame.
This is dumb, it's not like there were any really good top centers just there for the taking, and Burnside is basically advocating the kind of stuff that has gotten the Rangers into so much trouble in the past. Overpay for a player to fill a hole in the lineup, player doesn't live up to it. The Rangers don't have a strong center lineup but there hasn't been any easy fix for it like Burnside seems to be suggesting.
I don't know if that's what he's advocating. He just said that they still don't have a top line center. Considering everyone knows how difficult it is to find one of those on the free agent market or VIA trade, it's not unreasonable to think that Burnside is simply suggesting that the Rangers need to acquire one through other methods, like a an actual rebuild, something that Certain people here have pushed for frequently.
Quote:
As for a PP QB, what exactly is Del Zotto? Maybe the Rangers didn't look for one because they are developing one that's pretty good right now?
******* Burnside you suck.
The rest of it isn't anything new and it's not like this is actual insight into the Rangers organization and how they view Tortorella's job safety
I don't know if that's what he's advocating. He just said that they still don't have a top line center. Considering everyone knows how difficult it is to find one of those on the free agent market or VIA trade, it's not unreasonable to think that Burnside is simply suggesting that the Rangers need to acquire one through other methods, like a an actual rebuild, something that Certain people here have pushed for frequently.
It seemed like it was a pointed criticism at the Rangers for not acquiring a #1 center this offseason, not a general criticism about them not developing one, etc.
I never said a Backup was more important than a center, i just believe the former was more the reason why we didn't clinch a playoff spot.
It's not Biron per se, it's finally having a competent backup so that our
Star goalie doesn't burn out.
Why does the objective continue to be finding ways to weasel into the playoffs instead of constructing a team that doesn't have to worry about the final day of the regular season?
Do you want another first round loss, or a lengthy playoff run featuring a legitimate and entertaining hockey team?
I talked about it on the show last night and I frankly see Torts around for awhile no matter how bad things get.
He is the perfect fit for the organization. He hates the media, keeps everything in house. Blames the players when the heat is on and never points the finger at the higher ups or even more importantly himself when things go wrong..
Oh really? because I distinctly remember at least a dozen times, at least, where he took responsibility for issues and the team's failures and pointed his finger at himself.
Hmmmmm...........
maybe you were pre-occupied at the time and missed it
As far as a No. 1 center, what's the rush? I'm sure Burnside would be tickled if Sather traded Stepan and Grachev for Richards, only to have Richards become a 7-plus million dollar bust. Sather went out two years ago and acquired two possible No. 1 centers in Gomez and Drury. Drury is obviously overpaid, but that marks three teams in five years in which Gomez was a No. 1 center. It's not like Sather hasn't made an effort to address needs, which is what Burnside is implying.
- I don't see Burnside suggesting that at all.
- Drury and Gomez have never been number one centers for any healthy team.
- To call those two signings an effort on the part of Sather is absurd. Both of those signings were terrible decisions that were destined to fail from the start and you can't possibly consider them as an effort to address that need.
Quote:
Gaborik is 28 and low maintenance, so I can deal with Dubinsky or Stepan developing a little more into a No. 1 rather than trade or sign for one.
Pretty big assumption to make that either will ever develop into a number one center. Pretty dangerous one, too, from a long-term perspective. What do you if neither one reaches that goal?
Quote:
It's also funny how Burnside omits that Sather went out and addressed the most pressing need in the organization by acquiring Boogaard and McIlrath, and resigning Prust
Ridiculous. The most pressing need in the organization, BY FAR, is a number one center. He just handed out yet another awful contract to a guy that hardly plays and is utterly useless when his fists are inactive, and wasted a #10 pick on a goon.
Not so sure Biron will get as many starts as advertised. Once the Rangers need wins, which seems to be the norm, I'm pretty sure they'll play Lundqvist whether or not he is burned out or tired unless Biron is playing better than him.
It seemed like it was a pointed criticism at the Rangers for not acquiring a #1 center this offseason, not a general criticism about them not developing one, etc.
No "seems" about it. I think it was a pretty direct criticism.
Why does the objective continue to be finding ways to weasel into the playoffs instead of constructing a team that doesn't have to worry about the final day of the regular season?
Do you want another first round loss, or a lengthy playoff run featuring a legitimate and entertaining hockey team?
can i ask you where you are coming with this? the context of my posts were directed at coaching change. do yourself a favor and follow the the thread and the logic in responses.
McIlrath is not a goon, and spending a large quantity of money on this years "#1 centers" like Plekanec and Marleau would have been utterly disastrous to this club.
Newsflash. If you want an hfboards approved #1 center (There are like 10-15 in the entire league) You need to trade for them. And When I say trade I mean more than packages involving Gilroy, Bourque, and a 3rd.
We'd have to give up Dubinsky, Stepan, Grachev, 1sts, guys like that. How many of you here would be supportive of that kind of a move for a Joe Thornton or Brad Richards? I know I wouldnt.
can i ask you where you are coming with this? the context of my posts were directed at coaching change. do yourself a favor and follow the the thread and the logic in responses.
Probably this:
Ogie:
Quote:
If Biron can win even three more games that can give you 6 additional points. Which takes us from 87 to 93 points. Now the average amount of points needed to lock down the number 8 seed in the playoffs is 91.8 so say 92. That puts us in the playoffs.
Your response:
Quote:
I agree...
I think he just quoted you as your was the last sorta post in that brief thread of dialogue (ogie, chosen, you).
If we miss the playoffs and the team doesn't play hard or battle consistently this season, I'm okay with replacing Torts, as long as there's a good candidate...
I'm huge on the wagon to sign Richards when he's a UFA, but I would not trade anybody to get him, since the team is so reliant on its youth progressing.
you know, just because Burnside says Torts is on his hotseat doesn't mean Torts in on the hotseat. He'd have to pull in an Edmontonian season to get canned. If we are near or close to the playoffs, he'll be around. How long is his current contract?
Thought it was a decent write-up (Del Zotto has to continue to improve and as he said himself become more consistant quarterbacking the powerplay). The best line was the jab at Sather: The fish rots from the head down. If Torts is fired, Sather has only himself to blame.
