Player Discussion Alain Vigneault Part VI

[Fugazy]

Good move sitting that number 76. Not like he's looking good on the USA team or anything.

He didn't sit him, he lost him on the bench

 

[True Blue]

He didn't sit him, he lost him on the bench

Must say, of all of the things that I have heard come out of the Rangers org that ranks as one of the more head scratching one.

 

[Ori]

Must say, of all of the things that I have heard come out of the Rangers org that ranks as one of the more head scratching one.

It`s not that hard to figure out @True Blue - it`s about politics - AV had meetings with the whole coaching staff, and probably including Gorton & Sather who both watched the game. If we lost the game benching 5.7$ mil. salary in M. Staal - Sather would question AV - why not use in his view one of Rangers most paid defensive players?

So it make sense politically in the org. to value veterans who are paid most on this team. I`m not debating who is the best player rookie Skjei or NHL veteran M. Staal here, but my point is AV need consider such things as well in his defense.

They will evaluate the whole team now including our defense Girardi & M. Staal - then it`s easier to say for AV that they have declined due to concussion injuries, age, and body so it`s easier to promote a young defender when the season is over and look for buyout options. And when they figure out that he don`t have what it takes anymore to participate in NHL based on injuries or other reasons.

 

[SA16]

Sather sent guys like Redden to the minors I highly doubt he would question AV about why he doesn't play his 6M dman

 

[Fugazy]

Must say, of all of the things that I have heard come out of the Rangers org that ranks as one of the more head scratching one.

That was pretty much the breaking point for me. It's inexcusable.

 

[TheTakedown]

It`s not that hard to figure out @True Blue - it`s about politics - AV had meetings with the whole coaching staff, and probably including Gorton & Sather who both watched the game. If we lost the game benching 5.7$ mil. salary in M. Staal - Sather would question AV - why not use in his view one of Rangers most paid defensive players?

So it make sense politically in the org. to value veterans who are paid most on this team. I`m not debating who is the best player rookie Skjei or NHL veteran M. Staal here, but my point is AV need consider such things as well in his defense.

They will evaluate the whole team now including our defense Girardi & M. Staal - then it`s easier to say for AV that they have declined due to concussion injuries, age, and body so it`s easier to promote a young defender when the season is over and look for buyout options. And when they figure out that he don`t have what it takes anymore to participate in NHL based on injuries or other reasons.

I would normally agree with you, but the reality is whatever these guys are paid is irrelevant here, because Staal and Girardi have been, no hyperbole here, bottom 10 defensemen for over 2 years now... There comes a point when you need to accept your mistake and try to move past it. AV simply tried it over and over, almost as if he was expecting different results, and yet every time we saw that same issues.

I for one am hopeful that Gorton has laid out to AV what he's doing wrong with his "defense first, controlled breakout" hockey. It's an oldschool fallacy that needs to be eradicated from this team

 

[True Blue]

So it make sense politically in the org. to value veterans who are paid most on this team. I`m not debating who is the best player rookie Skjei or NHL veteran M. Staal here, but my point is AV need consider such things as well in his defense.

In the waning minutes of a playoff game, shouldn't the only thing that AV should be considering is who gives him the best chance to win the game?

 

[True Blue]

I for one am hopeful that Gorton has laid out to AV what he's doing wrong with his "defense first, controlled breakout" hockey. It's an oldschool fallacy that needs to be eradicated from this team

This goes back to "old school". AV is far from old school with his thinking. That was not the issue. His decision making is the issue.

 

[Ori]

In the waning minutes of a playoff game, shouldn't the only thing that AV should be considering is who gives him the best chance to win the game?

Yes, normally - AV rely too much on veterans I guess. It cost him in G2 and we gave away a 2 goals lead which should be 3 goals if not for G blind turnover.

 

[ponytrekker]

Must say, of all of the things that I have heard come out of the Rangers org that ranks as one of the more head scratching one.

It's code. I last heard it when my kid was a pee wee. The coach who rolled all 3 lines of his awful B team all year lost the last line when trying to win a game against an A team. Exact words.

 

[TheTakedown]

It's code. I last heard it when my kid was a pee wee. The coach who rolled all 3 lines of his awful B team all year lost the last line when trying to win a game against an A team. Exact words.

could you elaborate further? I am curious

 

[silverfish]

AV is definitely not the first coach to use the phrase "lost them on the bench". I think AV's used it before.

It's short-hand. Essentially what AV is really saying there is that he shortened the bench, he went to his "top-2 pairs" and when you shorten the bench, you lose guys in rotation.

I'm not so hung up on AV's words as much as I am his awful, awful personnel decisions.

 

[True Blue]

I'm not so hung up on AV's words as much as I am his awful, awful personnel decisions.

I think that we can agree on that.

 

[Thirty One]

AV is definitely not the first coach to use the phrase "lost them on the bench". I think AV's used it before.

It's short-hand. Essentially what AV is really saying there is that he shortened the bench, he went to his "top-2 pairs" and when you shorten the bench, you lose guys in rotation.

I'm not so hung up on AV's words as much as I am his awful, awful personnel decisions.

No, I'm pretty sure he literally couldn't find them.

 

[ponytrekker]

AV is definitely not the first coach to use the phrase "lost them on the bench". I think AV's used it before.

It's short-hand. Essentially what AV is really saying there is that he shortened the bench, he went to his "top-2 pairs" and when you shorten the bench, you lose guys in rotation.

I'm not so hung up on AV's words as much as I am his awful, awful personnel decisions.

Exactly. Why he'd shorten a bench to USE those guys I have no idea.

 

[silverfish]

No, I'm pretty sure he literally couldn't find them.

 

[RGY]

Watching the Senators play the penguns right now is heartbreaking. That should have been us. There was no reason we shouldve lost that series.

Please Fire AV.

 

[Ola]

Everyone hates AV, but for different reasons. Some because he played X defensemen in the last shift of a game instead of Y defense. Some because he plays a fighter in Glass. Some because he doesn't play fighters and turns the other cheek. Some because he plays Hank and not Raanta/Talbot. Some because he doesn't play kids. Some because he plays some kids too much. Some (many?) for all of the above. From my POV, I can't help but to wonder if its really smart to launch a classic NYR faithful hate campaign against the man. We are not choosing between AV and Babcock, its either AV or Ruff or Bylsma or someone like that. Messier.

EVERYTHING right now points towards the best thing you can do is to position yourself in the top 8-10 group and just wait for your turn more or less. With 31 teams and the cap, nobody is even remotely close to actually having a perfect team. Think some patience is in order. Just my humble opinion...

 

[Ola]

No, I'm pretty sure he literally couldn't find them.

When I am out hunting elks, we usually got a bracelet on the dogs with a tracker in case they take of. Maybe AV could implement something like that on the bench? He would at least get an indicator of in which general direction a player is in. Thoughts?

 

[Off Sides]

Everyone hates AV, but for different reasons. Some because he played X defensemen in the last shift of a game instead of Y defense. Some because he plays a fighter in Glass. Some because he doesn't play fighters and turns the other cheek. Some because he plays Hank and not Raanta/Talbot. Some because he doesn't play kids. Some because he plays some kids too much. Some (many?) for all of the above. From my POV, I can't help but to wonder if its really smart to launch a classic NYR faithful hate campaign against the man. We are not choosing between AV and Babcock, its either AV or Ruff or Bylsma or someone like that. Messier.

EVERYTHING right now points towards the best thing you can do is to position yourself in the top 8-10 group and just wait for your turn more or less. With 31 teams and the cap, nobody is even remotely close to actually having a perfect team. Think some patience is in order. Just my humble opinion...

I believe patience relates to waiting for something, with this team what are they waiting on?

They don't have elite up and coming skaters, or any elite ones on the current team.

My issue is far more with management than it is coaching although I don't think coaching is helping in that regard either.

Both management and coaching are going with the kick at the can approach, or the anything can happen idea.

I just disagree with that, generally and some specifically, teams who are closest or do win the cup post the salary cap had elite centers or centers who could play elite in the playoffs. They had a true #1D and a partner for him. They had a wing or several who can put the pucks into the net.

They also had what the Rangers have, players a tier below them who could elevate their games because they were playing against the other teams lower tiers.

Rangers are just not built correctly to win championships. They are built to make the playoffs and go with the anything can happen idea, but it's not happening. It's not as if they did not have their chances for it to happen, they just ran into teams who were built better, and/or had better coaching, and/or had those top tier players or players who played top tier.

Rangers are counting on the wrong players, other than Lundqvist. Nash is what he is, not going to carry the team. McD is very good overall, but not great offensively. Their centers, Zbad was good. Is Stepan, or really anyone else able to play top tier in the playoffs? Zucc was good, the other wings?

Rangers had Zbad as their leading point per game player at .75 Ties him for 19th among player this playoffs who played 7 or more games. Rangers next player, Zucc, McD, .58 ranks 34/35th

That is just not good enough. Nashville, Anaheim Pitt all have 4 players who beat Zbad in points per game with at least 7 games played, Ottawa has 2 such players. skaters who have the capacity to go near to 3/4, or a point per game, or even over a point per game.

Depth is nice, other teams have elite skaters or those who produce elite in the playoffs and they also depth. Rangers are missing a key ingredient. The most difficult one to get.

 

[True Blue]

Rangers are just not built correctly to win championships. They are built to make the playoffs and go with the anything can happen idea, but it's not happening. It's not as if they did not have their chances for it to happen, they just ran into teams who were built better, and/or had better coaching, and/or had those top tier players or players who played top tier.

Yeah, not sure that the wait and see approach is going to work. Especially when it seems that AV's system is built on the premise that the goalie needs to stand on his head to win if pond jockey is not allowed. Given that said goalie is now on the other end of the bell curve as far as his overall play is.

Without a super human Lundqvist, AV will need to adapt strategy. That has not been his strong suit.

 

[frozenrubber]

AV is definitely not the first coach to use the phrase "lost them on the bench". I think AV's used it before.

It's short-hand. Essentially what AV is really saying there is that he shortened the bench, he went to his "top-2 pairs" and when you shorten the bench, you lose guys in rotation.

I'm not so hung up on AV's words as much as I am his awful, awful personnel decisions.

Except when he's says something innocuous (and true) about Zibanejad, and then you call him a

****ING CLOWN

 

[silverfish]

Except when he's says something innocuous (and true) about Zibanejad, and then you call him a

Savage take, well played.

Meant in this instance though. But still. Nicely done!

 

[Levitate]

Since everyone wants AV fired who do they want to replace him?

Honestly I'd be happy if he could just fix his shortcomings because I think it will be a bit tough to hire a better coach and not just be shuffling deck chairs

 

[True Blue]

Since everyone wants AV fired who do they want to replace him?

Honestly I'd be happy if he could just fix his shortcomings because I think it will be a bit tough to hire a better coach and not just be shuffling deck chairs

I would be on the phone with Sutter yesterday.