Where is the indication that he will be bought out?
Also, are you blaming Tortorella for those players failing? All of those players (aside from Zucarello, who doesn't belong on that list) had already failed in numerous locations before arriving to NY. Is Dave Tippet a bad "teacher"? Is Ken Hitckcock? Laviolette? The main issue with Wolski/Christensen/Zherdev/Lisin is a severe lack of hockey IQ and intensity. Nothing else.
there is no indication, 94 just likes making wild assertions of opinion that go against what most people find reasonable. Most of the time he's wrong but then every once and awhile he guesses something right and then that encourages him
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerFan10
Also, ridicilious chemistry would be Ryan-Getzlaf-Perry. If Dubi-AA-Cally had this amazing chemistry that apparently is so good it makes them a line to end all lines, their point totals would be off the charts. they play well together because all three of them are talented players that go to the dirty areas of the ice and play good defensive hockey. You take one of them off the line and they'll be fine. It'd be a disservice to Dubinsky, Richards and Gaborik if you don't put them together as a line.
That doesn't make sense. Dubinsky, etc, aren't nearly as talented as the Ducks top line, but that doesn't mean they can't have fantastic chemistry together. They're just not going to score as much because they're not as talented.
That said, I do agree it's not a big deal to move players around if need be...the other guys will keep playing their game.
It's kind of funny if you browse other boards during the season, on most of them you'll see posters complaining about how their coach shuffles lines too much and "god just leave them together to develop chemistry!!"
Personally I think it's unrealistic to have a line stay together all year long. Often you'll see lines put back together a lot but when they eventually go cold, the coach will mix things up again.
We can start as that, but eventually we'll be switching our RWs. Richards played with Neal and Ericksson and the two on this team that most resemble that are Dubinsky and Callahan. Furthermore Gaborik didn't require Richards in the past and he won't require him now. What you suggest will be our PP units.
Where is the indication that he will be bought out?
It was reported so many times by so many that it is almost a fact. Where is an indication that he will not is more appropriate question.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Boyle
Also, are you blaming Tortorella for those players failing?
Sure I do. Poor coach can fail anyone. Great coaches can elevate any player. Blaming the workers is an easy way out for bad management.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Boyle
All of those players (aside from Zucarello, who doesn't belong on that list) had already failed in numerous locations before arriving to NY. Is Dave Tippet a bad "teacher"? Is Ken Hitckcock? Laviolette?
False. Tippet had no issues with Wolski. He needed good D and he got it in Rozy. Hitch wanted good D and he got it in Tyutin. Laviolette made Zherdev important. Something Torts never could.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Boyle
The main issue with Wolski/Christensen/Zherdev/Lisin is a severe lack of hockey IQ and intensity. Nothing else.
Another blunt statement. Intensity is a pumber's quality required to compensate lack of skills. All those guys had shown plenty of intensity with little result. That is because Torts is a "bottom 6 coach".
Hockey IQ is something that coach should possess first and foremost. Those who lacks it blame the players and sell that to fans.
We can start as that, but eventually we'll be switching our RWs. Richards played with Neal and Ericksson and the two on this team that most resemble that are Dubinsky and Callahan. Furthermore Gaborik didn't require Richards in the past and he won't require him now. What you suggest will be our PP units.
Richards plays the point on the PP -- those will certainly not be our PP units.
While Richards played with Neal and Ericksson in Dallas, that has absolutely no bearing on who he is best fit to play with in NY. He played with Ericksson and Neal there because they did not have the equivalent Gaborik.
Obviously there's a chance that Richards and Gaborik do not mesh, but the fact he played with Erickson and Neal have little bearing on that.
Laviolette made Zherdev important. Something Torts never could.
Zherdev was routinely a healthy scratch under Laviolette, so, I don't understand where you're getting the notion that he was "important". There's a reason he's still un-signed.
We can start as that, but eventually we'll be switching our RWs. Richards played with Neal and Ericksson and the two on this team that most resemble that are Dubinsky and Callahan. Furthermore Gaborik didn't require Richards in the past and he won't require him now. What you suggest will be our PP units.
I don't think Neal and Eriksson have any bearing on what will happen here. It's coaching 101 to try and put your best center with your best winger and hope there is some chemistry there. If there isn't, then I'm sure other options will be tried, but Richards and Gaborik are going to be given every opportunity to succeed.
94 just likes making wild assertions of opinion that go against what most people find reasonable. Most of the time he's wrong but then every once and awhile he guesses something right and then that encourages him
Same applies to you. Or anyone else here. People who are always wrong leave the boards. Those who are always right do not exist.
It was reported so many times by so many that it is almost a fact. Where is an indication that he will not is more appropriate question.
It's been reported that we'd consider buying him out, and speculated that we would. Speculation now makes for fact? Interesting.
Where is indication that he won't be bought out? Um, possibly the first post of this very thread?
Quote:
Sure I do. Poor coach can fail anyone. Great coaches can elevate any player. Blaming the workers is an easy way out for bad management.
Get back to me when a great coach "elevates" the games of Lisin and Zherdev.
Quote:
False. Tippet had no issues with Wolski. He needed good D and he got it in Rozy. Hitch wanted good D and he got it in Tyutin. Laviolette made Zherdev important. Something Torts never could.
Completely false. It was widely reported that Tippett had issues with Wolski's effort. Proving those reports, he played less than ten minutes per night over his last 3 games in Phoenix, and took seven shifts total his final game in Phoenix. Get your facts straight. And read this report on his final days in Denver..."Nobody was happy at all with his play, and haven’t for a little while now," hardly sounds like the Avs coaches were high on him.
Zherdev was a healthy scratch on numerous occasions and had his worst career season. He was one of the more unimportant forwards on Philadelphia. What are you talking about? As far as Hitch just wanting a better defenseman, yes and no... He never got along with Zherdev and cut bait. Nice article about Zherdev and his struggles with the coaches.
Quote:
Hockey IQ is something that coach should possess first and foremost. Those who lacks it blame the players and sell that to fans.
Enver Lisin was one of the dumbest hockey players I have ever seen. Absolutely no hockey IQ. Was that the MSG spin machine or John Tortorella that convinced me of that? No, it was my own friggin eyes. Tortorella has no hockey IQ? Come on. You're turning ME into a Torts fan with these asinine criticisms.
Zherdev was routinely a healthy scratch under Laviolette, so, I don't understand where you're getting the notion that he was "important". There's a reason he's still un-signed.
Scratching player is part of the coaching process. Forward's production is a result of coaching. You mistook process for result, which is quite typical.
As for Z not being signed, Flyers can afford let him go, they have so many good forwards that they let go even better Fs. Rangers are different story. Since we have never tanked we couldnt get like Flyers top forward talent from draft. Thus, we must have coach who could elevate "second best" to the level that would make a good use of those guys Sather picks up here and there. Renney was doing it, Torts can't and he doesn't want either.
Scratching player is part of the coaching process. Forward's production is a result of coaching. You mistook process for result, which is quite typical.
And Zherdev produced way less than he ever had under Laviolette. Meaning...?
I've never seen a person make so many excuses for players.
Personally, I am glad Wolski will be back. I think he is extremly talented, and if he could put it all together, you are talking about a 60+ point player.
I fully expect at least 20 - 20 season from him this year. If he plays to his ability, i wouldn't be shocked at A 30-30 season. This kid has that much skill.
I'm excited to see Wolski this year. I thought he was a little snake bit at times last year. Yes we saw the same inconsistent play that has been his M.O. over the years but at the same time when he was on he looked like a solid offensive player.
I want to see him playing with talent this year in the top 6.
It's been reported that we'd consider buying him out, and speculated that we would. Speculation now makes for fact? Interesting.
Where is indication that he won't be bought out? Um, possibly the first post of this very thread?
That is another speculation, since Brooks is hardly a reliable source. You wouldn't deny that Wolski buyout is a possibility, would you? As such I had all legitimate rights to express my opinion that that will happen. Those who think that Brooks has more insight should limit their readings to NY POST.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emma Royd
Get back to me when a great coach "elevates" the games of Lisin and Zherdev.
That is a very weak come back.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emma Royd
It was widely reported that Tippett had issues with Wolski's effort. Proving those reports, he played less than ten minutes per night over his last 3 games in Phoenix, and took seven shifts total his final game in Phoenix. Get your facts straight. And read this report on his final days in Denver..."Nobody was happy at all with his play, and haven’t for a little while now," hardly sounds like the Avs coaches were high on him.
Zherdev was a healthy scratch on numerous occasions and had his worst career season. He was one of the more unimportant forwards on Philadelphia. What are you talking about? As far as Hitch just wanting a better defenseman, yes and no... He never got along with Zherdev and cut bait. Nice article about Zherdev and his struggles with the coaches.
Scratching the player proves nothing but coach working with the guy, attempting to make him suitable. Most of the fans have no clue of what the process is so the numerous writers simplify it for them or no one will read their opuses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emma Royd
Enver Lisin was one of the dumbest hockey players I have ever seen. Absolutely no hockey IQ. Was that the MSG spin machine or John Tortorella that convinced me of that? No, it was my own friggin eyes. Tortorella has no hockey IQ? Come on. You're turning ME into a Torts fan with these asinine criticisms.
I am not fan of Lisin. I, however, do not believe in smart or dumb hockey players. It is a cliche used as I said earlier to simplify things for fans, but it is far from reality. Some players are easy to coach, some not. Not that I am comparing Lisin with Kovalev, but Keenan had no problem coaching Kovy (although he sat him at times), while Campbell and many others couldn't figure the guy out. Once the coach gives up on the talented player it is a coach failure. They need to cover it somehow. That is why you see plenty of blame channeled through media by club management since they have to stand by their decisions. I see little value in those "reports" therefore.
That is another speculation, since Brooks is hardly a reliable source. You wouldn't deny that Wolski buyout is a possibility, would you? As such I had all legitimate rights to express my opinion that that will happen. Those who think that Brooks has more insight should limit their readings to NY POST.
That is a very weak come back.
Scratching the player proves nothing but coach working with the guy, attempting to make him suitable. Most of the fans have no clue of what the process is so the numerous writers simplify it for them or no one will read their opuses.
I am not fan of Lisin. I, however, do not believe in smart or dumb hockey players. It is a cliche used as I said earlier to simplify things for fans, but it is far from reality. Some players are easy to coach, some not. Not that I am comparing Lisin with Kovalev, but Keenan had no problem coaching Kovy (although he sat him at times), while Campbell and many others couldn't figure the guy out. Once the coach gives up on the talented player it is a coach failure. They need to cover it somehow. That is why you see plenty of blame channeled through media by club management since they have to stay by their decisions. I see little value in those "reports" therefore.
Hardly a reliable source? Brooks is extremely reliable when dealing with sources. It's his independent speculation that is terrible.
Gonna have to agree with Emma Royd on this one:
Quote:
You're turning ME into a Torts fan with these asinine criticisms.
Personally, I am glad Wolski will be back. I think he is extremly talented, and if he could put it all together, you are talking about a 60+ point player.
I fully expect at least 20 - 20 season from him this year. If he plays to his ability, i wouldn't be shocked at A 30-30 season. This kid has that much skill.
This is how I feel as well.
I have to say I feel better about Wolski doing something this year than I did about Frolov last summer. About the same cap hit and about the same risk to the team to see if he can do it, which is not much. If he stinks we either trade him of just let him walk at the end. Either way Rangers win so whats wrong here?
