Player Discussion Alain Vigneault Part VI

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ail

Based and Rangerspilled.
Nov 13, 2009
29,140
5,225
Boomerville
See you at the crossroads
So you won't be lonely
See you at the crossroads
So you won't be lonely
And I'm gonna miss everybody
And I'm gonna miss everybody when I'm gone
And I'm gonna miss everybody
And I'm gonna miss everybody

Thirty One is paraphrasing, he actually read all of the lyrics in their entirety.
 

orland

Registered User
Jul 29, 2002
259
0
Weschester County, N
Visit site
The thing I can't figure out about AV is his fascination and attraction to slow defensemen who can't move the puck. The examples are obvious at this point. He always talks about wanting to play fast but somehow only trusts the slow ineffective veteran "warriors".

Opting to bench Skjei/Smith in favor of Staal/Holden in game 2 probably cost us that game and was out and out coaching malpractice. He actually said he had more confidence in "Staalsy" at that point. "Staalsy" game seemed to be a disaster towards the end of the season and playoffs; I don't understand how AV didn't see that.

My theory is that AV himself was a slow, tough defensman with little offensive skill and sees himself in the Girardi's and Staal's.

AV was clearly outcoached against the Sens. Boucher is known to be a tactician and AV struggles to make effective adjustments and reverts to the guys he trusts.

At this point we would be so much better off with a new young coach, perhaps a college coach who better understands the modern game.
 

True Blue

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
30,092
8,362
Visit site
Team was poorly prepared, unmotivated, took sloppy penalties, did not show the opponent enough respect, lacked hunger.... that's all on poor coaching.

He's modern day Jaques Martin or Roger Nielson. An intellectual that isn't smart enough in big moments who also ruminates mid-game before shooting himself in the foot.

For a match-up genius, he chokes like a little ***** when the pressures on.

Forwards didn't drive the net all playoffs. Made the little soft perimeter play after play.
That about sums it up. Except I do not think that he is a match up genius.
 

Rangerfan4life90

Registered User
Oct 14, 2008
10,417
2,192
College Point, NY
The thing I can't figure out about AV is his fascination and attraction to slow defensemen who can't move the puck. The examples are obvious at this point. He always talks about wanting to play fast but somehow only trusts the slow ineffective veteran "warriors".

Opting to bench Skjei/Smith in favor of Staal/Holden in game 2 probably cost us that game and was out and out coaching malpractice. He actually said he had more confidence in "Staalsy" at that point. "Staalsy" game seemed to be a disaster towards the end of the season and playoffs; I don't understand how AV didn't see that.

My theory is that AV himself was a slow, tough defensman with little offensive skill and sees himself in the Girardi's and Staal's.

AV was clearly outcoached against the Sens. Boucher is known to be a tactician and AV struggles to make effective adjustments and reverts to the guys he trusts.

At this point we would be so much better off with a new young coach, perhaps a college coach who better understands the modern game.

That's why AV deserved to lose this series (unfortunately for us), and I can't give the Sens a whole lot of credit. Any coach with half a brain wins this series in 5.

I want Daryl Sutter, but if we go the new modern young coach route, I wouldn't mind. Just make sure we don't get a Dallas Eakins type :laugh:
 

Bleed Ranger Blue

Registered User
Jul 18, 2006
19,799
1,811
Brooks had a good writeup a few days ago of the personnel on the ice when the Rangers blew leads in the series. Different each time. The people who are pinning virtually everything on the coach are willfully choosing to ignore some pretty strong evidence of the personnel deficiencies across this roster in search of a single scapegoat. Its simpleton thinking.
 

HatTrick Swayze

Just Be Nice
Jun 16, 2006
16,832
9,655
Chicago
Brooks had a good writeup a few days ago of the personnel on the ice when the Rangers blew leads in the series. Different each time. The people who are pinning virtually everything on the coach are willfully choosing to ignore some pretty strong evidence of the personnel deficiencies across this roster in search of a single scapegoat. Its simpleton thinking.

Or if it is a persistent problem across personnel, it could be a strategic issue...
 

Bleed Ranger Blue

Registered User
Jul 18, 2006
19,799
1,811
Or if it is a persistent problem across personnel, it could be a strategic issue...

It's undeniably both a personnel and strategic issue. There's no shortage of blame to go around here. But at the end of the day, when a coach puts out 3 different D pairs and different forward permutations, and 3 leads are squandered, that screams of a pretty major personnel issue thats often buried or ignored.
 

True Blue

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
30,092
8,362
Visit site
It's undeniably both a personnel and strategic issue. There's no shortage of blame to go around here. But at the end of the day, when a coach puts out 3 different D pairs and different forward permutations, and 3 leads are squandered, that screams of a pretty major personnel issue thats often buried or ignored.
Not sure this is accurate. The culprits were Girardi, Holden and Staal. No Skej out there. Smith was only once in those times and it was with Staal. Let's not forget the time that Smith was inexplicably "lost" while on the bench.
 

orland

Registered User
Jul 29, 2002
259
0
Weschester County, N
Visit site
Brooks had a good writeup a few days ago of the personnel on the ice when the Rangers blew leads in the series. Different each time. The people who are pinning virtually everything on the coach are willfully choosing to ignore some pretty strong evidence of the personnel deficiencies across this roster in search of a single scapegoat. Its simpleton thinking.

This comment is not valid. No one is pinning everything on the coach. We have some serious personnel deficiencies that have been discussed ad infinitum. The point is that the AV poor deployment of the flawed roster was a major cause of losing to the Sens. It is unlikely we could have done much against the Pens but losing to such a mediocre Sens team is hard to take. AV coached poorly and clearly was out-coached by Boucher. Is that even contestable?
 

offdacrossbar

misfit fanboy
Jun 25, 2006
15,907
3,455
da cuse
unless he's gone, this team will face the constant headwinds that comes with playing for a coach who makes winning more difficult.

he doesnt know how to best use the players he has. in a nut shell. thats it.

he needs to go.
 

Bluenote13

Believe In Henke
Feb 28, 2002
26,703
848
BKLYN, NYC
This comment is not valid. No one is pinning everything on the coach. We have some serious personnel deficiencies that have been discussed ad infinitum. The point is that the AV poor deployment of the flawed roster was a major cause of losing to the Sens. It is unlikely we could have done much against the Pens but losing to such a mediocre Sens team is hard to take. AV coached poorly and clearly was out-coached by Boucher. Is that even contestable?

FYI, There's a whole thread on blaming the coach.
 

Bleed Ranger Blue

Registered User
Jul 18, 2006
19,799
1,811
This comment is not valid. No one is pinning everything on the coach. We have some serious personnel deficiencies that have been discussed ad infinitum. The point is that the AV poor deployment of the flawed roster was a major cause of losing to the Sens. It is unlikely we could have done much against the Pens but losing to such a mediocre Sens team is hard to take. AV coached poorly and clearly was out-coached by Boucher. Is that even contestable?

When so many people struggle to define what being "out-coached" exactly means, then yes, it is contestable.

Was Boucher out coaching AV when his team trailed almost every minute played from games 1-5?

The Rangers, as a team, from the coach on down, didn't execute at the end of games 1,2 and 5 and it ultimately lost them the series. So, unless you think Boucher's master plan was to play possum and then nail us at the very end of games, I don't subscribe to these ambiguous "outcoached" garbage as the sole or even main reason the Rangers lost.
 

Bleed Ranger Blue

Registered User
Jul 18, 2006
19,799
1,811
Will I read anything on the internet today as hilarious as BRB accusing others of simpleton thinking?

I just did.

Thank you for your stellar contribution. I suppose its better than trying to defend a poor argument that everything will be better by firing one of the most successful coach's in Rangers' history.
 

Miamipuck

Al Swearengen
Dec 29, 2009
7,411
2,693
Take a Wild Guess
This comment is not valid. No one is pinning everything on the coach. We have some serious personnel deficiencies that have been discussed ad infinitum. The point is that the AV poor deployment of the flawed roster was a major cause of losing to the Sens. It is unlikely we could have done much against the Pens but losing to such a mediocre Sens team is hard to take. AV coached poorly and clearly was out-coached by Boucher. Is that even contestable?

No it isn't.
 

GoAwayPanarin

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
May 27, 2008
41,059
50,562
In High Altitoad
This comment is not valid. No one is pinning everything on the coach. We have some serious personnel deficiencies that have been discussed ad infinitum. The point is that the AV poor deployment of the flawed roster was a major cause of losing to the Sens. It is unlikely we could have done much against the Pens but losing to such a mediocre Sens team is hard to take. AV coached poorly and clearly was out-coached by Boucher. Is that even contestable?

I don't even think he was out coached by Boucher....

He out coached himself, which is worse. Boucher didn't make AV throw Staal out there for 20+ minutes a game or Glass out there with Staal while defending a lead late or refusing to use Skjei and Smith for the almost the entire 3rd period of game 2.

BRB making a myriad of excuses for AV is always entertaining. One of the most winningest coaches in franchise history just lost a series to a team that they should have beaten with ease, and his poor decision making was the #1 reason why.
 

bl02

Registered User
Jan 13, 2014
31,961
21,830
Is it contestable that he outcoached the great Julien who most on here wanted big time?
AV sucked vs the sens for the most part but I guess its hard to admit that he outcoached someone that most Ranger fans wanted just a few months back. A guy that was supposed to lead montreal very very far this postseason according to many av haters.
I'm not a big fan of AV either and at this point would not care if he is let go.
 

GoAwayPanarin

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
May 27, 2008
41,059
50,562
In High Altitoad
Lets not get it twisted, Hank posting a .950 Sv% got the Rangers passed Montreal.

I thought he handled the forwards very well in that series, but once again that series went a game further than it should have because of his Staal-Holden obsession.
 

bl02

Registered User
Jan 13, 2014
31,961
21,830
Lets not get it twisted, Hank posting a .950 Sv% got the Rangers passed Montreal.

I thought he handled the forwards very well in that series, but once again that series went a game further than it should have because of his Staal-Holden obsession.

haha ok i figured thats the standard rebuttal.
Price was also a .933. hank was .947.
Oh now its Rangers should have beat montreal in 5. Little different then what i read on here that Rangers would win one game maybe 2. guess coaching had nothing to do with the fact they won the series. it was all hank
 

Inferno

Registered User
Nov 27, 2005
29,681
7,949
Atlanta, GA
haha ok i figured thats the standard rebuttal.
Price was also a .933. hank was .947.
Oh now its Rangers should have beat montreal in 5. Little different then what i read on here that Rangers would win one game maybe 2. guess coaching had nothing to do with the fact they won the series. it was all hank

it really really was. anyone wanna run the high danger shots faced in that series? id bet anything Henrik saw more high danger shots than price.
 

Bleed Ranger Blue

Registered User
Jul 18, 2006
19,799
1,811
haha ok i figured thats the standard rebuttal.
Price was also a .933. hank was .947.
Oh now its Rangers should have beat montreal in 5. Little different then what i read on here that Rangers would win one game maybe 2. guess coaching had nothing to do with the fact they won the series. it was all hank

When they win, its a player/players. When they lose, its the coach. Best get used to this binary choice around here.
 

Inferno

Registered User
Nov 27, 2005
29,681
7,949
Atlanta, GA
FYI, There's a whole thread on blaming the coach.

theres also a whole thread blaming Marc Staal..Derek Stepan...Chris Kreider...the power play...and a ton of other things.

The coach made horrendous decisions...even you, who are seemingly his biggest supporter here, has stated repeatedly that you didnt understand some of the things he's doing.
 

bl02

Registered User
Jan 13, 2014
31,961
21,830
When they win, its a player/players. When they lose, its the coach. Best get used to this binary choice around here.

Plenty used to it for sure. Its ridiculous but its just the way it is. its happened with every nyr coach since i've been a fan from the 1980's and it will continue. The shelf life of a coach is very very short but the last thing i want is to run into the type of instability you see with the likes of the new york jets and ny knicks where coaches seem to change quite often.
Just good to throw some objectivity into the debate once in a while.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->