Rangers Re-Build Is Looking Really Good. Is The Sabres Re-Build Going As Well?

[Believer]

On 6/2/2022 at 3:50 PM, dudacek said:

this is a veteran team.

Goaltending aside… Watching the Rangers and TB series, both teams have many more grown men than the Sabres… We are a couple years and a few players away from competing successfully against either team, in my opinion…

[PerreaultForever]

17 hours ago, sabresparaavida said:

Even if it was from a try-anything approach, no other coaches in the NHL decided to try Tage at center, so I think he does get some credit. 
Tuch is also a heart player, I don’t think he didn’t give it his all in Vegas, and that was on a better team, yet he had his best year yet this year. To not credit Granato at all is silly. 

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. 

[JohnC]

9 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

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. 

You make a good point that it is difficult to give the coach the credit for Tuch's good play. That's a judgment that is difficult to be precisely accurate for any player or coach. However, it really doesn't matter who should get the credit. Usually, there are a variety of factors for a player's good or poor play. What the real issue is how did the player perform for his new team? The answer is that this acquired player was given an expanded role with his new team and was put on a #1 line that played up to its line designation. What is not difficult to conclude is that the coach put this player in a position to succeed. And he did. That's the important point. 

[dudacek]

9 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

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. 

Coaches probably get too much credit when things are good, and too much blame when they aren’t.

But what you’re basically saying here is there is never any “proof” a coach is good or bad, which of course is “silly.”

The proof is in the results: Gallant is a good coach because teams and players have had success under his watch.

Tuch probably had more individual success as a Sabre than anywhere else. You’re not going to get any more proof than that, so asking for more in his case and not others seems…inconsistent.

[sabresparaavida]

On 6/3/2022 at 3:28 PM, PerreaultForever said:

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.

Pulling back that original post. You said veterans who were playing better were just Okposo and Skinner. I then said Tuch also is playing better and now you’re basically just saying he doesn’t count? 

[sabresparaavida]

12 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

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. 

Granato put him on a line with Skinner and Tage, and all 3 played better than they have in years, or had career years. Some of that comes to the line choices and coaching style of Granato. How much? We don’t know for sure, but it is utterly ridiculous to say that he was not a factor.

[PerreaultForever]

4 hours ago, JohnC said:

You make a good point that it is difficult to give the coach the credit for Tuch's good play. That's a judgment that is difficult to be precisely accurate for any player or coach. However, it really doesn't matter who should get the credit. Usually, there are a variety of factors for a player's good or poor play. What the real issue is how did the player perform for his new team? The answer is that this acquired player was given an expanded role with his new team and was put on a #1 line that played up to its line designation. What is not difficult to conclude is that the coach put this player in a position to succeed. And he did. That's the important point. 

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. 

[PerreaultForever]

3 hours ago, dudacek said:

Coaches probably get too much credit when things are good, and too much blame when they aren’t.

But what you’re basically saying here is there is never any “proof” a coach is good or bad, which of course is “silly.”

The proof is in the results: Gallant is a good coach because teams and players have had success under his watch.

Tuch probably had more individual success as a Sabre than anywhere else. You’re not going to get any more proof than that, so asking for more in his case and not others seems…inconsistent.

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. 

1 hour ago, sabresparaavida said:

Pulling back that original post. You said veterans who were playing better were just Okposo and Skinner. I then said Tuch also is playing better and now you’re basically just saying he doesn’t count? 

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. 

[JohnC]

1 minute ago, PerreaultForever said:

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. 

Tuch, Tage and Skinner all played better last year under Granato than they did the prior year. Tage and Skinner made quantum leaps forward in their play however one wants to measure it. If you don't think that the coach was a factor in these three players being better is not really an important issue. The substantive fact is that each player was better last year under this coach. Just because you can't objectively measure something (coaching contribution to improved play) that has many elements doesn't alter the fact that Tuch and his line mates individually played better last season than before.  

[PerreaultForever]

1 hour ago, sabresparaavida said:

Granato put him on a line with Skinner and Tage, and all 3 played better than they have in years, or had career years. Some of that comes to the line choices and coaching style of Granato. How much? We don’t know for sure, but it is utterly ridiculous to say that he was not a factor.

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. 

[PerreaultForever]

2 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Tuch, Tage and Skinner all played better last year under Granato than they did the prior year. Tage and Skinner made quantum leaps forward in their play however one wants to measure it. If you don't think that the coach was a factor in these three players being better is not really an important issue. The substantive fact is that each player was better last year under this coach. Just because you can't objectively measure something (coaching contribution to improved play) that has many elements doesn't alter the fact that Tuch and his line mates individually played better last season than before.  

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)

[JohnC]

5 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

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)

With respect to the issue of who should get credit for better play by a particular player I simply don't care that much. The salient point is a player performing better than previously. 

I would put the C on Okposo. Whether Tuch or Okposo wears the C is irrelevant to me. One can act like a captain without wearing the letter. 

Edited June 5, 2022 by JohnC

[LGR4GM]

Someone should look up when players came back from injury. Tuch gets absurd amounts of credit on this board for things others contributed to.

[JohnC]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

Someone should look up when players came back from injury. Tuch gets absurd amounts of credit on this board for things others contributed to.

If other players or coaches are contributing to his success that is a good thing. It shows that he is a good fit. On the other side of the equation when he plays well other players also benefit from his good play. There's a futility in trying to precisely determine why a player is playing well when in reality there are usually many factors. The bottom line is when line mates play well it influences the play of the other players. I just don't see the point in this case in trying to apportion credit for his good play.  

[PerreaultForever]

9 hours ago, JohnC said:

I would put the C on Okposo. Whether Tuch or Okposo wears the C is irrelevant to me. One can act like a captain without wearing the letter. 

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. 

[Huckleberry]

On 6/3/2022 at 7:43 PM, Curt said:

Posted in another thread:

I really hate to sound like I’m letting Sabres off the hook, but the NYR really are not comparable because it’s NYC.  

The Rangers’ rebuild included another team’s prospect stiffing his team by refusing to play anywhere but the garden then turning into a Norris level player, another top pair defenseman forcing a trade to NY, and one of the elite offensive wingers in the league choosing to sign there.  That’s 3 of their top 6 players who they got for little to no cost because the player chose them.

Not to mention that a 4th round pick from 2014 just emerged as a Vezina goalie for them.  That had nothing to do with steps they took over the past 3-4 years to rebuild the team.

I think 3/4 of their team hasn't been drafted by them even.    

Also they were extremely luck they beat the penguins in round 1 , that series would have been 4-0 if not for their goalie.   I consider them being this years Montreal, just their goalie will play for them again next year.

[JohnC]

6 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

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. 

A captain designation can't overcome a lack of talent, right mixture of players, coaching, organizational stability etc. A letter doesn't make you superman. 

[Malazan]

On 6/3/2022 at 7:47 AM, bob_sauve28 said:

Drury didn't seem to want any part of Eichel. Drury seems to know what he is doing 

Not that I disagree, I don't really know enough about the Rangers.. but aren't most of these players from the previous GM? Hiring Gallant is the only thing of note I'm really aware of from Drury since taking over. 

[PerreaultForever]

6 hours ago, JohnC said:

A captain designation can't overcome a lack of talent, right mixture of players, coaching, organizational stability etc. A letter doesn't make you superman. 

obviously not, but I'm just talking about the locker room and the attitudes of young players. This team had no leadership and was a mess inside that locker room. Toxic cultural problems have clearly been an issue even if we as fans were never privy to the details. Girgs and Okposo didn't cause that, but they didn't lead either. I just think their value is over rated. They fell into the veteran leader roles due to a lack of other candidates. Kyle definitely stepped up, but he's not a key part of the future imo that's all. I see him gone in a year OR relegated to a smaller role. I want a captain in place who loves the team, wants to be here, and will be here for the future. We need to be looking forward, only forward. 

imo Tuch's arrival (and Eichel's departure) is day 1, and everything before it goes in the dumpster. 

[JohnC]

6 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

obviously not, but I'm just talking about the locker room and the attitudes of young players. This team had no leadership and was a mess inside that locker room. Toxic cultural problems have clearly been an issue even if we as fans were never privy to the details. Girgs and Okposo didn't cause that, but they didn't lead either. I just think their value is over rated. They fell into the veteran leader roles due to a lack of other candidates. Kyle definitely stepped up, but he's not a key part of the future imo that's all. I see him gone in a year OR relegated to a smaller role. I want a captain in place who loves the team, wants to be here, and will be here for the future. We need to be looking forward, only forward. 

imo Tuch's arrival (and Eichel's departure) is day 1, and everything before it goes in the dumpster. 

Jack wasn't with the team last year. Yet when there is talk about a toxic room his name is constantly brought up. The person who was most responsible for de-contaminating the room was Don Granato. Soon after replacing the prior overwhelmed and befuddled Krueger, the room started to breathe and have some order to it. Another major factor for a better atmosphere is there simply was more developed talent than before. When the room genuinely believes that it can compete with anyone there is clearly a more positive environment.  

I don't really care if Okposo or Tuch are the official captains. You don't have to be the designated captain to provided leadership. That's what counts!

[DarthEbriate]

3 hours ago, Malazan said:

Not that I disagree, I don't really know enough about the Rangers.. but aren't most of these players from the previous GM? Hiring Gallant is the only thing of note I'm really aware of from Drury since taking over. 

With hindsight it looks like Drury's done quite the job (an ECF appearance and Hasek-level goaltending will have that effect). I'm not accustomed to doing Rangers research and it feels a bit gross, but let's delve into the timeline anyway!

5/5/21 - Drury hired/promoted as GM [groomed as AGM for years]

6/16/21 - Hires Gerard Gallant as head coach. [Good call]

7/17 & 7/22/21 - acquires F Goodrow from TB for a 2022 NYR 7th. Goodrow is set to be UFA, but on 7/22 extends 6x$3.6M [this is a magnificent move for playoff contributor, though some might worry on the term].  Also trades F Howden to SJ for DiSimone and a pick.

7/21/21 - F Dryden Hunt 2x$762k [grit... ]

7/23/21 - Buys out D Anthony DeAngelo. [GM Gorton waived DeAngelo during the previous season for incident with G Georgiev. Per article, this was not isolated: "Gorton said waiving DeAngelo was the result of a culmination of incidents this season that was becoming a distraction, including the way the defenseman reacted to being scratched." From <https://www.nhl.com/news/tony-deangelo-of-new-york-rangers-clears-waivers/c-320927558>.  Drury follows through on the buyout and getting rid of a rotten, if talented, piece.]

7/23/21 - Trades F Buchnevich to STL for F Blais and a 2022 2nd. [No indication of not liking the player/dressing room aspect here, simply clearing a player they can't extend with Fox's extension kicking in and other offseason extensions to be made. No one generally agrees with return... didn't get enough for a good offensive player.]

7/23-24/2021 NHL DRAFT: 1-16 LW Othmann (OHL), 3-65 C Grubbe (WHL), 3-75 C Korczak (WHL)  [I didn't research the picks any further]

7/28/21 - Signs F Greg McKegg 1x$750k [more grit...]

7/28/21 - D Patrik Nemeth 3x$2.5M (M-NTC) [more and more grit... this "Tom Wilson fear" is getting ridiculous... who is going to score for this team now that Buchnevich is gone? Is Chris Kreider going to put up 50??? Getouttahere!]

7/29/21 - Trades 2022 3rd to VGK for F Ryan Reaves (then extended through 22-23 season at $1.75M (same as his acquired contract). [This is absurd and GM Drury is a laughing stock for his fear of Wilson and simply trying to be tougher to play against. No one can take the Rangers seriously.]

Summer extensions: F Chytil (2-year bridge); D Lindgren (3 year); G Shesterkin (4x$5.6M), Zibanejad (8x$8.5M), Fox (7x$9.5M) [Can't argue with any of those in hindsight.]

[And then Kreider goes off the hook and Shesterkin goes from .916 in 35 games (and some Calder votes, after super-hot "unsustainable" intro season of .932 in 12 games) to .935 in 53 games. Here's where [edit: Drury] really makes hay... the 2022 trade deadline acquisitions that essentially chase all of the offseason "grit" players out of the lineup except for Reaves, who is skating <10 min/game, [edit: and move the kids (LaFreniere/Kaako) into their proper positions in the lineup.]]

3/16/22 Acquires F Frank Vatrano from FLA for a 2022 4th

3/21/22 Acquires D Justin Braun from PHI for a 2023 3rd

3/21/22 Acquires F Nick Merkley from SJ for D Anthony Bitetto

3/21/22 Acquires F Andrew Copp and 2023 6th from WPG for Morgan Barron, 2022 1st (it was conditional 1st/2nd and conditions are met to bump it to a 1st this year - NYR won 2 playoff rounds), 2022 or 2023 2nd (WPG's choice), and a 2023 5th

3/21/22 - Acquires F Tyler Motte from VAN for a 2023 4th

52-24-6 (110 points), 2nd in Metropolitan  [They've got home-ice advantage against TB's (matching 110 points but only 51 wins) in the ECF. All-in-all a really good first year as GM.]

Edited June 6, 2022 by DarthEbriate