Alain Vigneault

[Clown Fiesta]

You really don't know much about the Vancouver situation, do you

Shucks you got me...

Can I ask where you are going with this? What you quoted is true, they finished much worse this season than any of the last five.

Are you going to point to the goaltending situation? Luongo was there the majority of the year and he's still a very good starter. It's not as if they were setting the world on fire before his trade.

Going to say missing their coach caused them to fall as bad as they did? That's part of who he is, he was a detriment to his team at that point. That needs to be included in the evaluation of his performance.

Did they have to overcome some other atrocity? What is it?

 

[Jersey Girl]

4. Does NickyFotiu have such a limited view of the game that he holds a grudge against Tortorella for not playing Zuccarello years ago?

LOL perhaps Torts said at one point he didn't know who Nicky Fotiu was and now he holds a grudge!

 

[NickyFotiu]

1. Yes!

2. Yes!

3. When the GM who hired you is fired, it's normal procedure for a new GM to bring in his own coach. I'm sure we can at least agree on that...right?

#3 was not answered yes or no but I give you credit for the first 2 answers. Thank you for that. To answer your question it is still unusual when on a 5 year deal especially when it was the owner not the GM that brought Torts in to Van.

 

[NickyFotiu]

4. Does NickyFotiu have such a limited view of the game that he holds a grudge against Tortorella for not playing Zuccarello years ago?

I do not hold grudges but I also do not like a nasty disrespectful person who is dishonest and draged the team I have loved for parts of 5 decades down.

LOL perhaps Torts said at one point he didn't know who Nicky Fotiu was and now he holds a grudge!

I'm sure Torts does know who Nicky is BUT Torts being Torts he might say he did not know who he was as you implied.

 

[Jersey Girl]

#3 was not answered yes or no but I give you credit for the first 2 answers. Thank you for that. To answer your question it is still unusual when on a 5 year deal especially when it was the owner not the GM that brought Torts in to Van.

Well now you've brought opinion into our 'facts' conversation.

But if you want to go in that direction, general opinion is that ownership is a huge part of the dysfunction in Vancouver, so any clear cut 'this is what happened in Vancouver' statements are just speculation from 3,000 miles away from people who do not know all the facts - because all the facts are not public.

 

[Clown Fiesta]

You obviously have some sort of bias against Tortorella, yet are preaching emotional reactions to stop. Its gold.

If you're going to be Mr. Self-righteous and "blame who deserves the blame," blasting Tortorella for '11-12 is an interesting way of going about it considering he did a helluva job with that team.

And, for the record, I think the coach has only a small bearing on where a team ultimately winds up.

I don't recall blasting Torts, he certainly gets credit and that was a good team. I'm simply bit putting him on an altar and don't think in the grand scheme of things that the '11-'12 team is an example of what teams should strive to be.

LOL this comment stands on it's own. Genius.

I'm not sure I follow you, then again since you only interpret things the way you want to interpret them how could I?

Please point to anywhere that I contradict what I said. Your resorting to this type of comment proves you don't have a leg to stand on. Considering you stopped paying anything relevant to the discussion two pages ago...

 

[Jersey Girl]

I'm sure Torts does know who Nicky is BUT Torts being Torts he might say he did not know who he was as you implied.

Actually Torts would probably say he didn't give a **** who Nicky Fotiu was!

 

[NickyFotiu]

Well now you've brought opinion into our 'facts' conversation.

But if you want to go in that direction, general opinion is that ownership is a huge part of the dysfunction in Vancouver, so any clear cut 'this is what happened in Vancouver' statements are just speculation from 3,000 miles away from people who do not know all the facts - because all the facts are not public.

Most people in the media and fans acknowledge that Torts was brought in by the owner not the GM. Was I in the meeting room? No. Neither were you. Does that mean I have to stick my head in the sand and ignore the multiple reports on the subject? Torts and Gillis seemed on different pages for months so that goes along with what the media and their fans say.

To summarize you are now saying that Torts will only be fired because Gillis brought him in and Gillis was fired? Or if it was the owners that brought Torts in then the owners are the problem? Is Torts ever responsible for his own actions or record? Seems he never gets the blame for any of it in your posts.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

I don't recall blasting Torts, he certainly gets credit and that was a good team. I'm simply bit putting him on an altar and don't think in the grand scheme of things that the '11-'12 team is an example of what teams should strive to be..

There seems to be no grey area between "putting him on an altar" and recognizing the Rangers don't advance to the ECF's all that much -- and there should be.

 

[NickyFotiu]

Actually Torts would probably say he didn't give a **** who Nicky Fotiu was!

He probably would unless looking up to Nicky in private without the media to watch his ridiculous circus act. Torts probably hates Nicky because Nicky is actually the tough guy Torts pretends to be.

 

[Jersey Girl]

Shucks you got me...

Had a feeling you didn't know much about Vancouver, glad you can admit it. Just don't talk like you know all the facts about the situation there, and we can have an actual conversation.

And Torts OBVIOUSLY was part of the problem - not the whole problem, but part of the problem. I for one was shocked when they brought Torts in in the first place. Just did not seem like a good fit, and I was right.

The only thing I can attribute it to was the usual sports hiring of wanting to get the opposite type of manager/coach than the one who left. We don't know what went on during the interviews - whether Torts said he would mold his style around the team, or whether Gillis said he wanted Torts to mold the team around his style - but we do know it clearly didn't work.

But so much more when wrong there besides Torts - some of it public, some of it not - that any 'this is what happened in Vancouver' statement tends to be extremely ill-informed. Even Bob MacKenzie isn't sure what happened in Vancouver, or why.

 

[Clown Fiesta]

Had a feeling you didn't know much about Vancouver, glad you can admit it. Just don't talk like you know all the facts about the situation there, and we can have an actual conversation.

And Torts OBVIOUSLY was part of the problem - not the whole problem, but part of the problem. I for one was shocked when they brought Torts in in the first place. Just did not seem like a good fit, and I was right.

The only thing I can attribute it to was the usual sports hiring of wanting to get the opposite type of manager/coach than the one who left. We don't know what went on during the interviews - whether Torts said he would mold his style around the team, or whether Gillis said he wanted Torts to mold the team around his style - but we do know it clearly didn't work.

But so much more when wrong there besides Torts - some of it public, some of it not - that any 'this is what happened in Vancouver' statement tends to be extremely ill-informed. Even Bob MacKenzie isn't sure what happened in Vancouver, or why.

I was being facetious and expecting you to clue me in on things I didn't know. Which you didn't, and probably can't. Which is evidenced by you ignoring me asking you to elaborate on the Vancouver situation as it relates to Torts coaching performance and not sports business.

 

[True Blue]

Since Torts achieved nothing then I guess you have your comparison. Seriously either accept the facts as facts while looking at the big picture or don't, but accepting some facts because they fit your argument while ignoring others seems counter intuitive and is a waste of time.

I view what Torts did here as an achievement.

You're going to try and say that Torts making the conference finals is a bigger accomplishment than AV making the finals? Ok. Thank you for the laugh.

No, I am saying that Torts accomplished more in post season hockey than AV did.

In their last 6 playoff appearances AV is 28-28 while Mr. Amazing is 21-29.

Spin this to somehow convince me I'm wrong, GO!

Mr. Amazing = 1 Stanley Cup
AV = ZERO

Spin this somehow to other than what it is. GO!

 

[Jersey Girl]

To summarize you are now saying that Torts will only be fired because Gillis brought him in and Gillis was fired? Or if it was the owners that brought Torts in then the owners are the problem? Is Torts ever responsible for his own actions or record? Seems he never gets the blame for any of it in your posts.

I don't know the whole story and neither do you - which is pretty much the point.

And FWIW, while Torts was here, I was blaming him for a bunch of stuff. I did not like the team's style of getting a one goal lead and running back to our defensive zone to have six guys blocking shots the rest of the game, I did not like spending half a period at a time in our own zone killing a five on five power play, I blamed him for our offensive problems because his coaching style seemed to have players so nervous they were squeezing their stick too tight in the offensive zone, and I absolutely hated how he treated the media during post-game interviews.

I said all that WHILE he was here, and WHILE he was having a successful season in 2012.

 

[GordonGecko]

Torts brought the Rangers further than anyone has since we had Mark Messier Wayne Gretzky, and Brian Leetch. Dump on him and his system all you like, call them an anomaly as much as you like, but you cannot change history.

And it wasn't a fluke playoff run with a hot goalie - Torts also brought the team over a long season to the best record in the East and within two games of the Stanley Cup finals. Facts.

FWIW I hated Torts' system, even when we were winning - the endless five on five power plays where we spent a month in our zone at a time were mind numbing to say the least. But that doesn't take away from what Torts accomplished here.

And saying Torts ran Vancouver into the ground is short-sighted and uninformed. It probably looks that way from 3,000 miles away, but those who have been paying attention know that Torts was just one more mistake by a highly dysfunctional management team that ran the organization into the ground from above.

Yeah give the guy some credit but his system drove our guys into the ground and turned some of them into head cases. Basically that ECF was as far as he could take us and we got real lucky to be able to win those game 7's against OTW & WAS

The guy burns players out with his scorched earth pedal to the metal all the time approach and his style just suffocates offense. He totally choked off Vancouver's offense

 

[Jersey Girl]

I was being facetious and expecting you to clue me in on things I didn't know. Which you didn't, and probably can't. Which is evidenced by you ignoring me asking you to elaborate on the Vancouver situation as it relates to Torts coaching performance and not sports business.

OK, so you DON'T want to have an actual conversation, you're more interested in a p****** match of 'you didn't and probably can't' type of posts. Got it.

 

[Tawnos]

There seems to be no grey area between "putting him on an altar" and recognizing the Rangers don't advance to the ECF's all that much -- and there should be.

This is a pretty consistent problem. People recognizing Brian Boyle as a 4th line player were dubbed haters and vice versa. People acknowledging the good things Sather has done have been dubbed apologists and vice versa. Etc.

By the way, the answer to the question of how many other coaches have gotten us that far is 6 (Francis, Shero, Patrick, Sator, Keenan, Campbell) when talking a modern playoff format. And believe it or not, I consider 2 final four appearances or later per decade to be a pretty good history for a team. The 00s screw it up.

 

[BrianLeetch2]

Torts is not our coach anymore, Who cares what he did in Vancouver. This is about AV and the AMAZING job he did this season.

I am glad Torts is gone and replaced by what I think is a coach that will evolve this franchise into modern day hockey.

 

[Clown Fiesta]

I view what Torts did here as an achievement.

No, I am saying that Torts accomplished more in post season hockey than AV did.

Mr. Amazing = 1 Stanley Cup
AV = ZERO

Spin this somehow to other than what it is. GO!

The facts I presented still disprove your theory that Torts was more successful with the Rangers than AV was with the Canucks. You know the most relevant comparison we have in terms of recent success.

Congratulations on your Stanley Cup ten years ago Torts, I'm sorry it's not relevant in a discussion on recent playoff success between two teams and coaches though. Had I claimed AV had more overall success throughout his career however, you would have proven me wrong.

OK, so you DON'T want to have an actual conversation, you're more interested in a p****** match of 'you didn't and probably can't' type of posts. Got it.

Wait so you're still being reactionary and not actually adding to the discussion? Yet you're appalled by me saying that you've shown an unwillingness to have a discussion yourself?

Perfect example, you focused on that instead of answering my question.

 

[True Blue]

He totally choked off Vancouver's offense

Maybe. But then again, Vancouver did not have a problem underachieving in the playoffs before Torts got there.

 

[Clown Fiesta]

Maybe. But then again, Vancouver did not have a problem underachieving in the playoffs before Torts got there.

They also didn't have a problem making it to the playoffs.

 

[True Blue]

The facts I presented still disprove your theory that Torts was more successful with the Rangers than AV was with the Canucks. You know the most relevant comparison we have in terms of recent success.

When Av has multiple 2nd round appearances and one ECF trip. we can discuss what you disprove.
Congratulations on your Stanley Cup ten years ago Torts, I'm sorry it's not relevant in a discussion on recent playoff success between two teams and coaches though.

Who won a Cup fairly recently and who has not is a pretty relevant discussion point

.

 

[True Blue]

They also didn't have a problem making it to the playoffs.

The also underachieved with superior talent.

 

[GordonGecko]

Maybe. But then again, Vancouver did not have a problem underachieving in the playoffs before Torts got there.

Yeah that was the knock against AV in VAN and what got him released. Let's see what he can do with the Rangers, I'm optimistic

 

[Clown Fiesta]

When Av has multiple 2nd round appearances and one ECF trip. we can discuss what you disprove.
Congratulations on your Stanley Cup ten years ago Torts, I'm sorry it's not relevant in a discussion on recent playoff success between two teams and coaches though.
.

Can't help that you don't understand the difference between winning 50% of your games and winning 42% in comparison. Is a decade especially before the 1st lockout really that relevant to today's game? Is a great accomplishment, one I certainly give him full credit for. But it makes for a weak argument when you're comparing apples to apples and just put an orange in there as your proof.