Weird. One would think that the Rangers would've made regular trips to the finals and secure President's trophies in the 9 years Lundqvist was the goalie preceding AV.
Or, it could be that argument is opportunistic and half-baked.
He had way more to work with than either of his predecessors. That was true in 15-16 too when the team bowed out in the 1st round.
I don't think you'll find many people who had an issue with what he did during his inaugural season as Ranger coach. The guy shuffled the deck until the found the right combinations and stuck with them (with a roster that was mostly put together before he even got the job, might I add.) The playoff turtles were tough to watch, but turtle or not I don't think they beat LA unless they got the bounces they didn't get and Dan O'Hallaran doesn't forget how to do his job - They lost to a better team and I think most of us were okay with that.
They won the Presidents trophy on the back of their goaltenders. Sure they scored a ton, but lets not pretend like both Hank and Talbot didn't have to be superhuman at times in order to squeeze out wins. Everything that he did well in his first season dissipated after that, and the team has only further deteriorated ever since. Need I remind you this team got shut out in back to back home games because AV was way to stubborn to change things up that weren't working.
Or how about how he had Tanner Glass out on the ice against the Stamkos line in both games 5 and 7 for the winning goals against? Or Tanner Glass playing over superior players at all?
This is before his debacle in the playoffs last year.
I don't understand how anyone can defend this dude and I don't think you understand it either, because you haven't made any sense.