You keep on banging down this door. You say convesation about Trots is pointless, but yet keep bringing up his name. Those early Nashville teams were not young at all. And when they were, they were NEVER as young as the Rangers. A Trotz team did not did not get a playoff win until his 6 full year coaching. But wait, there's more. A Trotz team did not get as much as one playoff series win until his 12th year in the league. You keep up bringing his name over and over and over again, but the fact is that his experience in "building" Nashville resulted in waiting 12 years until the team could get a single playoff victory here. Want to sign up for that right now with the Rangers? You should. Because you keep up bringing what a wonderful job he did with Nashville.
You were told time and time again. Gorton did not need to wait until the season was over until he made his hire. He identified his man. At that point it made not a single lick of difference if Trotz became available. Not one.
Gorton identifying his choice to lead the youngest team in the league is far from awful management. It was a calculated decision as to what was best for the franchise. And guess what? It was NOT Trotz.
That is because very few people see it as an awful decision.
You wanted your golden boy to become the head coach based on what he did with a Nashville team? Then you had better be on board with waiting until 2031 for the Rangers to get their first playoff series victory. How does that sound?
You are such a die in the wool Ranger fan it's incredible. "In Gorton we trust" "Gorton knows best" " Gorton is a soothsayer"-- just print the t-shirts up already!
How can you not see that a proven NHL head coach is a better option than a "he will work with the young guys" hire??? Also how could you possibly know if Gorton thought Trotz was his guy. HE DID NOT EVEN KNOW HE WOULD BECOME AVAILABLE!!!! That's my entire point. Maybe when Trotz became available Gorton said to himself " geez I should have waited." Obviously he won't ever say that and we will never know but again, he rushed to get "his guy" before he even knew all the candidates. Literally every single organization that hires these types of "stop gap coaches" end of replacing them with a proven winning NHL coach anyway. Not all of them do it successfully( as is witnessed by Toronto and the Babcok hire), but as I pointed out in this thread a few pages back, every single rebuilding team gets rid of their coach once they feel they are ready to take the leap to being more competitive. So why not just go right to the stage of, we want the Rangers to have a competitive approach each season and hire the best NHL coach that's out there! That's really not even a hard line of thinking to support.
Each time I read people defend this justification that Quinn was the Rangers guy it just makes me realize even more that the Rangers are brilliant at getting and attracting fans who are actually like pigs to a slaughter. Just accept a mediocre hire, just accept a week structure and poorly established foundation, but all is good because at least the organization got their man beind the bench and announced they were rebuilding. Is it not even possible to look critically at organizational decisions?
Just to shut this line of counter arguement down too-- I'm not advocating the Trotz would even be the guy. He's showing he can coach up a roster right now with the Islanders and I think he would have done amazingly well here with the Rangers. My main issue is the rush to hire Quinn.