Torts out in NYC
- Thread starter KW Sluggo
- Start date
dappleganger
Active member
Right move by the Rangers. I don't think a team can excel when your coach calls out his players in the media the way did. Saying one of your players "stinks" on the powerplay, you just don't use that terminology even if you think the player is playing poorly.
Vigneault would be a good fit in my opinion.
Vigneault would be a good fit in my opinion.
WhatIfGodWasALeaf
Active member
Cheaper to fire him than buyout Richards.
WhatIfGodWasALeaf said:
That's exactly what I was thinking too when I saw the story on TSN.
Plus, if you are going to park Brad Richards and his contract for the last two games of the series (after demoting him to the 4th line) you pretty much have to win if you expect to remain coach.
Kin
New member
KW Sluggo said:
But wasn't the story that the whole reason that Richards signed in New York in the first place was because of Tortorella? If that's the case it's hard to imagine that what happened this year was the result of a personality conflict or a situation where one had to go. I thought it was pretty well accepted that Richards deserved the benchings.
bustaheims
Active member
Omallley said:
I'm not. There's been some suggestion that Lundqvist and Torts don't have the best relationship, and that Lundqvist was more likely to leave as a UFA if Torts was still behind the bench. If that's true, you side with the franchise, Vezina winning goalie over the coach who really wasn't able to get the most out of his roster. Honestly, I think the Gaborik trade at the deadline signalled the beginning of significant changes for the Rangers, and that was probably the beginning of the end for Torts.
WhatIfGodWasALeaf
Active member
bustaheims said:
While I agree that it signalled a change in direction, it seemed to me to be the type of change that would have been pushed for by Torts, I took the Gaborik trade as an endorsement of sorts.
Still, I think it's come down to his abrasive temperament wearing out it's welcome, with players and media, there are only so many times you can 'give them the stick instead of the carrot' before they just stop listening.
Kessel Run
New member
One report said that Lunqvist's exit interview had a lot to do with this, and it came about pretty quickly.
Nik the Trik said:
That was the story at the time Richards signed but Tortorella has a tendency to be abrasive and to call out individual players. This time he turned on one of his loyalists.
When you do this with a a high profile elephant bucks signing one (player) or the other (coach) has to go. When others on the roster such a Lundquist see the soap opera and make noises about leaving, that makes Sather's choice rather obvious.
Having said that, the Rangers still are obligated to pay a lot of coin over a long term to a player that maybe can no longer perform at a level commensurate with the contract. Richards may yet be gone too.
Losing a round earlier than last year did not help but had the Rangers won, I suspect the benching and the antics would have been overlooked.
Richards alone may not have been enough but this is hardly Torts' first run in with a player and the accumulated effect of this latest one coupled with the loss to the Bruins and finally the lukewarm statements from Lundquist about re-signing all would have worked in concert to push Sather to end the sideshow.
The availability of some reasonable alternatives in Vigneault and Ruff also provides Sather with an immediate replacement.
Corn Flake
New member
Wasn't a big reason Richards signed in NYC was to play for Torts?
LOLiorny.
AV gets the job, IMO, but I hope they hire Messier because that would be awesomely bad.
LOLiorny.
AV gets the job, IMO, but I hope they hire Messier because that would be awesomely bad.
Redleaf
Active member
I really hope Gillis hires Torts for the Canucks coaching position. It will probably be the final touch to the implosion we've been witness to the past season or two. This once great organization that Burke and Nonis basically put together, has been crumbling piece by piece since Gillis took over, and this could finally be the straw that breaks the camels back.
KoHo
New member
Why is that the Canucks are such a "hate-able" team? Don't get me wrong - I hate them too - but it's just interesting how they became so disliked. When they were in the cup finals everyone was cheering for the Bruins. I don't know, there's just something about that team that I can't stand. I guess it has to do with their diving, whining, finger-biting, choking, rioting, and arrogance?RedLeaf said:
(kinda just answered my own question there)
OldTimeHockey
Active member
KoHo said:
I think it's very much like the Toronto syndrome. They get a lot of attention from the media and it's not often that people enjoy hearing about how great the other guy is.