PerreaultForever

Better than watching baseball or golf (how can anyone watch golf???) but I only watch the big world cup type events where the crowd and spectacle of it all make it better. Not a lot though. Kind of wild that Canada made the World Cup so will have to watch that until they lose out at least.

Here's the crux of why Kyle shouldn't get the C. He gets an absurd amount of praise around here because he played better this season, presumably because he recovered fully from head injuries etc. and he wrote that passionate letter to the fans. All good, BUT if he was such a great leader (and this goes for Girgs too), if they were such good leaders why was this team totally lacking leadership in prior seasons and why couldn't they get Eichel and Risto and Reinhart and everyone else who was here to buy in and excel the way the team seems to be growing now? History matters.

I have in the past called it the Tuch factor. The team got substantially better after the trade was made, Tuch arrived, and then quite a bit better the minute Tuch laced them up and stepped on the ice. So I will leave it at this agree to disagree point. You credit Granato, I credit Tuch. Let's hope next season they both do well and the team does even better. (But if they don't slap the C on Tuch they are insane)

It's not ridiculous. After we traded for Tuch I'm pretty sure every single person here was chomping at the bit waiting for him to suit up and everybody felt he would elevate whatever line he was on. Giving Skinner a shot at the top is a credit I give to Granato but Tuch was a no brainer.

Regarding Tuch, see above. Regarding Granato and coaches, it's about wins plain and simple. Gallant's teams win hockey games. They over achieve like that World team. Your comments might seem obvious to you in some ways but I'm equally amused that so little credit for the Rangers success is going to Gallant. It's all Shesterkin, it's winning the lottery twice, it's Drury's acquisitions, and so forth while the one commonality that is overlooked is Gallant has turned his team into a winner every time. Without Gallant I doubt they'd have even made the playoffs. Granato on the other hand seems to have a low bar evaluation. Don't get me wrong, I don't hate the guy, I think he's a good coach, a good teacher, I'm just not sold on him as being this great coach signing from KA and the jury is still out on him as a head coach. He has to have a winning season before I jump on that bandwagon. Next season, if Boudreau wins in Vancouver, and Gallant wins again in NY while Granato loses here, the coaching decision won't look so good will it? Here's hoping that isn't what happens. he doesn't because he wasn't on the team here last year. He was a good player already and elevated because of where he is imo.

I can't agree with the progression you make here. I really don't see that Granato did anything. He put Tuch on a top line. Where else was he going to put him? Where would you have put him? Same place right? You start there and if he plays well he stays and if he plays poorly he drops down. Not rocket science. Tuch came off an injury to a new fresh team, his childhood team, the one he dreamed of being on when he was a wee lad. You think he was going to step on that ice and float? Granato had nothing to do with it. Credit KA with getting a guy who wanted to be here as he said, but it wasn't coaching.

The last sentence is the key to the argument right? As a 4th line, making typical 4th line money, I have no problem with them. Correcting it in the negotiation is an assumption and I'm saying you can move on from both of them because I think they will try the open market anyway rather than accept 4th line money to stay. Just my assumption. "Important to the growth of the team" is a whole other point of argument and does lead to derailing the thread so leave it there as an agree to disagree on that.

That's my thought too. With all those solid 100 point teams, this is the potential playoff spot up for grabs. I think Pittsburgh and Washington also have some question marks, but the Bruins look set to fall hard so if you can have a big leap forward season the potential to be next year's Rangers is there for the taking.

Well if you want you can bring back Larsson too would that make everyone happy? That was the praised 4th line that wasn't a 4th line wasn't it? Just one problem with all of this, we still haven't WON games and had a winning season. You guys really need to step back and stop over valuing a losing team's talent.

Well they're not the same so shouldn't be considered as a unity but it's not so much low regard, as maybe pieces of a horrible past and not part of the future. Kyle had a good year - finally. I'm far from the only one who a year ago was discussing him as a stiff or talking merits of a buy out and so forth. Harsher critiques than I've ever given were common. So suddenly he's a warrior? A little extreme but good if he is. Should get a good price for him at the deadline then. As for Girgs, not low regard but indifference. No more vital to this team's success than Cody Eakin.

Why? How did Granato make Tuch better? If it's silly to not credit Granato it's also silly to credit Granato. There's absolutely no proof. It's speculative either way. You going to tell me Tuch didn't play one of his best games the day Eichel came to town? Was that for Granato? Think about it.

But to the point of discussion, I'm not crediting Granato with Tuch's play, I'm going to credit that to him playing for his hometown blue and gold and wanting to rise to that challenge and responsibility. I don't think it took much coaching to get him to give his all. (and that's why I want him as captain next year as well). I'm not even going to credit Granato with the one big genius move of the year, Thompson at center. Maybe it's Don's genius, but I think it more likely he lucked out after just making the move out of a try anything approach due to a lack of centers at the start of the year. I will be happy to be wrong, and if he's out there, psst, try the reverse idea, Cozens at wing. Not a narrative, just a fact. See posts above. Look at his stats.

No, to the bold, I'm not. My comment was based on his play this season. That line scored a lot of goals for us but they were not a good line defensively. Skinner attacked the net better and shot the puck better, and the other two guys cleared some more space for him and Granato even found him a PP role which in the past has eluded him due to a lack of discipline and poor passing/decision making but he still got caught out of position a lot, back checked poorly, and made some bad decisions, especially in his own end and away from the puck. Skinner was much better obviously and was the Skinner we can hope for, but he's a one way player.

I will place a friendly bet with you that he lets both of them walk (possibly trading them at the deadline if we are out of it) but neither will be back after this year unless they sign for peanuts.

veterans playing better that's really just Skinner and Okposo right? He definitely is better at adapting and letting players play their game. Kreuger broke Skinner by insisting on stuffing a square peg into a round hole but Skinner's still a big defensive liability and makes a lot of dumb and sometimes selfish plays. It's who he is and likely always will be. I'm not sure where the accountability will come in. It may be there. Again, we shall see. When they all talk like Cozens in interviews and when a guy who scores a hat trick in a losing game says he wasn't good enough, then I will know they are there. I hope Granato brings that and we finally have a winning season.

The problem I have with this is what do you do with these veterans and their "bad contracts". Lead the young guys sounds good but if these are guys teams want to dump they obviously don't have a lot of value in those team's eyes. After having cleaned out and fixed this locker room do we want it filled with mercenary stiffs who don't give a damn while they cash their cheques? You'd have to be really careful with who you brought in. Risky. maybe just overpay a goalie and 1 or 2 key free agents is a better plan.

Which is why I stick to my mantra of draft one every single year. They have unique and unusual development curves and even late picks, you just never know and can't have too many.

I think that's true. Drury wants players who think like Drury. Hard work, effort, leadership, definitely not Eichel. So if we had traded Eichel to the Rags would they have missed the playoffs and we'd be discussing the lottery protection issue on their 1st? 🙂

Honestly, we're not really disagreeing. The one thing missing imo is the player changes. Removing those that had to go and adding those that wanted to be here. I think that had a much bigger impact on the locker room than the coach did. The question now is can Granato create a solid system and structure that will lead to wins. Consistent wins. It's kind of a clean slate now with openings for potential leaders to take over and help the team leap forward, but it'll all fall apart quickly if we don't win. Granato's have fun and enjoy yourselves out there approach takes them so far, the next step is viewing losing as unacceptable. We shall see if he can deliver on that.

I have never understood why some people like this guy. I thought he was a horrible D man and a liability even. If we're talking a depth guy for Rochester sure, sign him, why not, but if we're talking Sabres forget it. Cut him loose.

I'm not convinced hiring Granato was some sort of genius move by KA. I still believe they went cheap and in house and it was a low risk option in that the building plan was laid out to take several years. Now, that's not to say Granato won't be a spectacular coach, but he wasn't a proven commodity at this level. Gallant on the other hand has a resume of success. Unbelievable success in fact. It's possible he doesn't play well with owners and upper management (much like old Ted Nolan) but his coaching success is undeniable. Granato doesn't have a winning season under his belt yet.

It's a real apples and oranges comparison. We are nowhere near them. They have a great goalie, we have none at this point. They signed big name veterans like Panarin and Kreider and already had Zabanejad. I suppose the way they fleeced Boston on the Nash deal is similar to how we traded Risto for quality picks and they have a few top lottery picks, but unlike us, those lottery picks are not the core of the team right now. They have marginal roles at this time. Fox also wanting only to play there didn't hurt their chances, and everybody already knows I wanted KA to hire Gallant. They have 4th line grit and a balanced roster. We have potential and some potentially great young talent, but we also have holes all over the line up. Now if KA adds a great goalie somehow and some solid veteran talent to play with the young players we might be closer, but I doubt that happens. We are going to have to wait and hope that Levi or Portello or maybe UPL saves us and that might be a wait.

confidence or ego? There are 2 ways to look at that.

I was just thinking, I don't like any of the teams left. So don't really care who wins. Oh well, wait for next year.

Remind you of anything? (hint 1997) The Gallant factor should not be underestimated either. He took Vegas pretty far with a good goalie too didn't he?