Jan
30

Rangers give Alain Vigneault two year extension

January 30, 2017, by

Photo: James Guillory-USA TODAY Sports

Per Larry Brooks, the Rangers have given head coach Alain Vigneault a two year extension. Vigneault, whose contract was set to expire after next season, is being rewarded for a pair of Conference Finals appearances, one Stanley Cup Finals appearance, and one President’s Trophy.

AV came under fire last year for his deployment of his so-called favorites, but has taken a step in the right direction this season. He is not the perfect coach, as anyone who watches his defense deployments will tell you, but he’s a solid hockey mind. He certainly has offensive strengths, even if he lacks defensive evaluation.

Vigneault has a solid record with the Rangers, at 175-97-23, good for a .632 win percentage. By the time the season is over, he will be fourth in franchise history in coaching wins. Love him or hate him, he’s had a good run.

"Rangers give Alain Vigneault two year extension", 5 out of 5 based on 5 ratings.
Categories : Coaching

110 comments

  1. Spozo says:

    This should be an interesting thread……

  2. Larry says:

    I think it’s a 2 year extension? His old 5 year contact won’t expire till next year.
    .

  3. Ben says:

    Oh, only three years? The email said five, this is better in comparison. Still, while I agree with Dave that his defensive strategies need work, and I wish he was more adaptable/flexible, he has been effective overall. Though that lack of flexibility has killed us in the playoffs.

  4. Bloomer says:

    I read it was a 2 year extension in the Post. Fair summary by Dave, he does have his “pets” and tends to scrap goat certain players. He coaches a entertaining style of wide open hockey, which was exploited in 2 Stanley Cup series. I always have said AV is a good coach, but he is no Scotty Bowman.

    • Joe Mama says:

      Idiotic comparison.. Scotty Bowman is a top 5 coach all time…

      • Walt says:

        True, but E3 always refers to AV as a HOF coach, so compare him to real one!!!!!!!! Just tweaking people with this post my friend……….

  5. Eddie!Eddie!Eddie! says:

    Reposting what I posted on the other page…

    I’m surprised they’d do it now, but this should put to rest the notion that a) players don’t like or respond to the coach and b) Gorton’s not a fan.

    I’m neither for or against the move. I would have waited until after the season but when you have a future HOF coach, then I guess you have to lock him up long term. 🙂

    I think some of our BSB brothers are going to have nightmares tonight! 🙂

    • Spozo says:

      I’m surprised about how this came out of nowhere. Well at least we know that AV is a “Gorton type coach”.

      I brought up earlier this week that those who want AV fired seem to overlook that Gorton is the guy that kept the coach here. Let’s see if those posters stay consistent and call out the GM now!

    • Sammy says:

      Eddie if you remember I said this was in the works a few weeks ago. So this should get a thousand comments. We still need a defense but the players like playing for him and his record is good. You can’t win without the the right players. Time will tell

      • Eddie!Eddie!Eddie! says:

        Great call Sammy! You nailed it.

      • Bloomer says:

        AV has had rosters that give coaches wet dreams. We need a defense because Alain doesn’t understand defense, Its’ one touch and go with forwards camped out at center ice.

        • Walt says:

          He had two HOF, as E3 calls them, players the Sedin twins, and a great supporting cast, and still couldn’t get the job done. Regular season means nothing when he can’t win it all. I think this is a big mistake on Jeff’s part !!!!!!!!!!!

          • Snake says:

            Agreed. And if this is the direction the Rangers have decided to go in for the next 4 seasons, it is extremely disappointing.

    • Richter1994 says:

      LOL, guess that answers that, huh?

      No, not nightmares. I don’t hate the guy, I just wish he would so certain things better, that’s all.

      After all is said and done, if there are no better options or much better options AND the Rangers are stilling putting in the effort for their coach then this makes sense.

      PLUS, I get 2 more years to criticize. 🙂

    • Walt says:

      E3

      Please stop with this HOF crap, he is a disgrace and belongs in the HOS !!!!

      This thread just put my bowels in an uproar !!!!!!!!!!!

      • Hatrick Swayze says:

        Walt, agree or not, he will be inducted. Coaches have been inducted who have accomplished less.

      • Eddie!Eddie!Eddie! says:

        Take two Pepto Bismols…that usually works for me. 🙂

        I totally get that you are not a fan. That’s ok. Not every coach is going to be liked by everyone in the fan base. What I don’t get is, why do you get worked up to this degree? How is he a “disgrace”? What has he done to deserve that level of criticism that’s reserved for the Bryan Trottiers and Jean Guy Talbots on the Rangers coaching tree pecking order? Isn’t that just a tad over the top?

        Let’s put the subjective descriptions aside for the moment. What have we learned from this that is almost certainly true if not 100% factual?

        1) Gorton is obviously a big fan of AV. You don’t offer an extension AND an enormous raise this far out before the contract expires if you thought otherwise. The notion that somehow he’s not in AV’s corner has been disproven.

        2) Also disproven is the notion that AV’s message has worn thin in the lockerrom. Or that, as we saw in the situation with Torts, that the players have had enough of him to the point they wanted him out. Gorton wouldn’t have offered him an extension if any of that were true.

        3) Whether he is a future HOF coach or not remains to be seen. But what is an absolute is that Gorton, after watching AV closely over the past three plus seasons, believes that this coach is among the best available or likely to be available for the foreseeable future, has done an excellent job with the talent given to him, and that he is the coach that can eventually win it all given the right players.

        You yourself have praised Gorton for many of his recent decisions and you’ve expressed confidence in his ability to assess talent. So doesn’t he (and the coach) deserve the benefit of the doubt?

        • Richter1994 says:

          BTW, I don’t think it’s a $2M per raise, Brooks said “a bump up from his $2M salary.”

          Overall I guess you do this because sometimes it’s the devil you know vs. the devil you don’t.

          But let’s get something clear, and it’s simply my opinion, with all the “success” here, I think the coach has UNDERACHIEVED based on the teams he’s had and circumstances.

          Argue away, lol.

          • Eddie!Eddie!Eddie! says:

            My mistake on the bump.

            Well, clearly Gorton would not agree with you. You don’t reward a coach with an extension if that were actually true that he underachieved.

            But since under/overachievement is a subjective condition that is determined through the eyes of the beholder, it’s a reasonable debate that you and I had before.

            I absolutely believe he has overachieved and to me there is no question about it.

            2013-14. Took over from Torts who had UNDERACHIEVED in every season he was coach except one (and in that one he had the most disppointing playoff loss of this run when he lost to an inferior Devils team, so you can argue that ultimately ended in underachievement too). Year one he takes them to the SCF. Overachievement.

            2014-15. Had arguably the finest regular season in team history despite the fact that they had nowhere near the depth they had the previous season. (As you all have mentioned many times, he had to play Tanner Glass!). Yet he still guided the team to a great season. The playoff run was derailed only because of the injury to Zuc and the whole defense playing through significant injuries. And they lost to an emerging power that in this past World Cup had 11 players on various rosters compared to our 5. The Bolts when healthy are a vastly superior team. Overall, OVERACHIEVEMENT.

            2015-16– You’re Jeff Gorton and you go to a fortune teller prior to the season. She tells you, your key defensemen will be playing hurt most of the season due to last season’s injuries and subsequent rehab. You challenged your emerging star (Kreider) to take that next step and instead he will be a year away from taking it. Your second year emerging star (Hayes) will come to camp out of shape and will have a very disppointing season. Your one legit star forward (Nash) will suffer a significant leg injury. Your number one center breaks his ribs.

            Add it all up, and what would be the expectation? A playoff miss. To finish with 101 pts under those circumstances is hardly an underachievement by the coach.

            They lost to a juggernaut in the future SC champions. I can make the case last year was an overachievement but a first round loss, I think we can just call it a wash.

            I think we can agree on this….if Gorton believed what you believe, no chance AV gets the extension he just got.

            • Eddie!Eddie!Eddie! says:

              Oh an this year so far….

              On pace for a 106 pt season in a transitional year that most thought we’d be a borderline playoff team at best.

              For what it’s worth, mid-season Rangers grades….

              Craig Custance (ESPN)– A-

              NHL Network crew– A

              Thus far, massive overachievement.

              • Hatrick Swayze says:

                Let’s see what the records are combined this year and last year over the first 41 games and the second 41 games. Hopefully last years trend doesn’t repeat itself.

            • John B says:

              2013-2014: His year. Yea. Go AV. Rangers only gave up though 190 GA, all situations all year.

              2014-2015: The year of Hank. Less depth? Hayes replaced Richards no loss, St Louis replaced Callahan, no loss. Stemp replaced Pouliot, no loss. Boyle replaced Stralman, granted that in hindsight is a loss, however Boyle out produced Stralman in 14-15 than did Stralman in 13-14. So, not buying the “no depth” argument. The players who came in produced as well as or better than the people they replaced. Why is it the year of the Hank, AV opens the team up with ever more transition style speed attack. GF go up a lot, GA however remain at 189 GA all situations.

              2015-2016. I just don’t know where to begin here. Key defender? McDonagh missed only 9 or so games. You mean Girardi? Oh you mean that “key defender”? Lets not go there. If he’s our “key defender” we’re screwed. Either way, injuries don’t cut it. I’ve never used injuries to justify or rationalize anything not about to start. This is also the year that AV begins playing games with Hank. Rangers offense? Still good! Rangers defense exploited to the tune of 215 GA in all situations.

              2016-2017..Rangers on pace to surpass the 215 GA from year prior.

              This all sounds familiar? Hmm. OH YEA!
              Looking at Vancouver after 2010-2011, they began giving up more and more goals. AV began playing games with Luongo. AV didn’t adjust his game plan at all and kept trying to do what wasn’t working.

              AV is the equivalent of Norv Turner and Rex Ryan rolled into one. He’s a GREAT offensive mind. He’s a players coach in that he lets the players run the room. What do Turner and Ryan have in common, they weren’t GOOD Head Coaches.

            • Richter1994 says:

              Torts underachieved? 2011-12 was one of the worst talented NHL teams to reach the Conference Finals. Torts got them to play the game they could to get where they needed to go.

              Unfortunately it was an unsustainable way of playing and they ran out of gas. I thought Torts an unreal coaching job that year.

              The year after, he had more talent and tried to play the same way and it didn’t work.

        • Walt says:

          E3

          We are polar opposites, and so be it. I hate the treatment of some of the players, and the favoritism of others. We win as a team, or we sink as a team. Bottom line, you have your opinion of him, I have my own, and they are 180 degrees apart. Keep posting your novels in support, and I’ll take my shots when he screws up !!!!!!!!

          • Eddie!Eddie!Eddie! says:

            That’s as it should be. Fair enough. I look forward to our future spirited debates!

  6. Bayman says:

    “He is not the perfect coach, as anyone who watches his defense deployments will tell you…”

    Anyone? Hasn’t Gorton watched the defensive deployments? Does he count as an ‘anyone’? The ‘anyones’ who agree the defensemen we have here all stink (save McD)? Which is it…they all stink or they’re deployed poorly? If they all stink, deployment won’t matter much, will it.

    This ‘anyone’ has seen the defensive deployments and I trust AV and staff over the ‘anyones’ who argued for years that McIlrath should play regularly here while no other team in the league felt he was worth a waiver claim.

  7. raulponty says:

    This is excellent news! What a great day to be a Rangers fan!

  8. Peter says:

    This should dispel the banter that somehow it is all the work of the evil AV when things are done certain ways and players are deployed certain ways and that Gorton is not on the same page. At least, one would hope that it does.

    Gorton is a smart hockey man. He apparently likes AV’s work. The team is flawed, and had a very bad run of injuries, yet is up there in the standings. That kind of stuff generally gets coaches rehired. I don’t agree with everything AV does. But, I don’t know diddly about hockey compared to AV and Gorton.

    Here’s to a great second half, maybe at least a little defensive help at the trading deadline, and hopefully the return of the flying forwards running rings around the competition!

  9. pas44 says:

    “Vigneault has a solid record with the Rangers, at 175-97-23, good for a .632 win percentage. By the time the season is over, he will be fourth in franchise history in coaching wins. Love him or hate him, he’s had a good run.”

    Nuff Said.

    • Richter1994 says:

      I will speak for myself, I haven’t taken anything away from him based on his success even though I have issues with him. He has been successful here, no question.

      • Sammy says:

        I agree Richter. And when I say we need the players, obviously I’m talking about our defense. Of course he’s not perfect but I’d like to see how we do with a solid defense. I think we’re gonna find out in the next few years

        • Richter1994 says:

          Sather has handcuffed the team with the G and Staal contracts. That’s over $11M per in cap space that could be used for 3 D men that are even better players than G and Staal are. That’s horrendous use of the cap and that’s not on the coach.

          But the coach does have a responsibility to play the players he has in the best way possible and as Hatrick Swayze correctly stated above, even if they are bad players. That is on the coach as he continues to play his faves when much better options are available.

          A lot of fans are saying “don’t trade anyone” which is fine then don’t whine when the team has an early playoff exit.

          • JoeS. says:

            You will not hear me whining, I understand the complexities, time, and, yes, luck it takes to win a Stanley Cup!

    • Walt says:

      If you want to play brides maid, AV is your man !!!!!!!!!!

      The regular season is for show, the PO’s is for dough, and this coach isn’t making any pizza any time soon……………….

      • Hatrick Swayze says:

        Out of curiosity, did you complain about Renney? Tortarella?

        If so, what were your qualms with each.

        • Spozo says:

          I can tell you he complained about tortorella. I remember one post where he blamed the coach for “making” Kreider block a shot which ended up causing bone chips in his foot. I believe that is about where my theory of “blind coach hate” started.

          • Walt says:

            I just posted above that I came down on Tort’s as well. I fess up when I have to. As for the hate crap, give it up dude, I don’t hate the man, just how he does his job, and the way he handles some players, and let’s others slide. You treat everyone the same is my biggest issue, and have stated so on many occasions !!!!!!!!!

        • Walt says:

          Renny did a very good job, with garbage players. Tort’s was stern, and in his final years I came down on him as well. Hope this answers your question !!!!!!!

          • Hatrick Swayze says:

            Thanks for the response!

            Renney, by most accounts was a worse offender of playing favorites. And his favorites were directly tied to a players contract. In other words, the guys signed by the brass got the minutes despite their level of compete night in and night out. From what I can tell that’s one of your more staunch gripes with the current coach.

            Which is why Torts, as least initially was so refreshing. I went full circle on Torts during his time here. Love to hate. He turned into a circus in Vancouver but I’m happy things are going well in Columbus. He seems to be a good coach for that roster and things are going well this year. In large part, due to some of his adjustments. Leaning on Wennberg and Werenski over older dogs and perhaps mastering the DH (Sam Gagner) better than any other coach in hockey (what AV would like to do with Pirri). In any event, good to see. If I had to predict things, his demanding style will again lead to less tenure they he may otherwise enjoy once the wins stop piling up.

            • Walt says:

              He played the best he had, and tried to teach the younger players at the same time. Did he play favorites, maybe so, but it wasn’t to the detriment of the final results, where AV’s shows how his bad decisions, Girardi bad knee last year, did big time !!!!!!!!!!

      • Eddie!Eddie!Eddie! says:

        Five playoff series wins in three seasons is a pretty good sign he can make the pizza–and he’s done it with no elite forward talent. Has there been a SC Champion post lockout that hasn’t had an elite center? The Rangers have very good players. Other than Hank, no great ones at the moment.

        You referenced Vancouver earlier. It’s a fair point and has to be considered in the conversation. But is it the coach’s fault when the Canucks goaltending falls apart, and that Tim Thomas had one of the greatest SC Finals of this century?

        This is not Herb Brooks coaching the Miracle on Ice. The coach can only do so much. Your best players have to play like your best players. That didn’t happen in 2011 in Games 6 and 7. Is that more on the coach or the players?

        • Walt says:

          You always say he hasn’t had great players to work with, I’m countering that point with that Vancouver team, great players !!!!!!

          • paulronty says:

            Getting into a debate with Eddie is like sitting on the can with constipation. It’s like listening to a parrot reapeating over & over, “Polly want a cracker.”

      • paulronty says:

        You got that right. As I said yesterday, time makes fools of us all, so we’ll be the fools until time determines our fate.

    • John B says:

      Using NHL math with the OTL, yes his record looks great! Lets not count a loss as a loss after all.

      Lets all accept the fact that OverTimeLoss still equals a LOSS.

      175-120 looks a lot less spectacular huh? At .593 isn’t as good huh?

      I detest the OTL crap the NHL made up. It needs to go away completely. A loss is a loss, whether it occurred in overtime or in regulation time.

      Hell the Rangers have lost in the first 3 minutes of the first period in a few games this year, how come we don’t have a stat for Lin3min:60?

      • Hatrick Swayze says:

        You get half as many points as a win, so call it half a half win. AKA 2 OT losses = 1 win. Convert and run our percentage. That seems like a nice happy medium to me.

        • John B says:

          A happy medium? Moral victories don’t register in the standings.

          A loss, is a loss. Whether it occurs in the first .001 seconds of the game, or in the 64:45 mark of the game.

          Points are irrelevant to it. He’s won 175 games as coach. He’s lost 120 as coach.

          • Hatrick Swayze says:

            You get a point if you lose after regulation.

            Said points accumulate in the standings.

            Thus they aren’t irrelevant.

            Derp!

            • John B says:

              Where do points factor into a winning percentage?

              The original comment was:
              ““Vigneault has a solid record with the Rangers, at 175-97-23, good for a .632 win percentage. By the time the season is over, he will be fourth in franchise history in coaching wins. Love him or hate him, he’s had a good run”

              That is only accurate if you use fuzzy NHL parity influencing numbers. Not points. You want to debate the whole loser points and standings different argument.

              The fact is, 23 over time losses are…..losses. Therefore, they need to be counted as…losses.

              Now if you want to make the argument “AV is a great coach cause he’s accumulated ‘xx’ points out of a possible “xx” points, completely different argument.

              23 overtime losses are losses. Therefore, the Rangers are actually 175-120 under the coach, for a .593 winning %. Not point %, therefore, to the original posters line of argument, points are irrelevant.

      • paulronty says:

        So true about a loss being a loss. The NHL uses this ridiculous system to keep lesser teams in the hunt to maintain interest & bring in more cash. Everyone knows the 3-2-1 system would be the logical way to go with ZERO points for a loss. The current system has kept the Panthers afloat this year.

  10. Dan says:

    What did Keenan do before our run in 94? How bout after? All you need is that one magical run to put you over the top. I thought we had it 3 years ago but it didn’t work out. I really think we’re close (meaning in 1-2 years). I think the extra 2 years is smart, at the end of it, you can properly evaluate him. It’s not his fault he got stuck with these horrible contracts on D.

    Like a lot of us, I don’t agree with how he deploys his defense or how it seems how he handles the locker room, but there is no one else available right now that I’d want. Capuano? Gallant? Please. This is the most consistent success we’ve had in a long time. I’ll take consistent playoff berths and winning records every year, especially when you don’t have the elite talent in the league like Crosby, Malkin, Burns, McDavid, Doughty, Kane, Toews, the list goes on and on.

    • Walt says:

      Sorry Dan, if he deployed, and or adjusted with Girardi in the finals against the Kings, we could have, or should have won. The man can’t think, or adjust mid game, or is too damn stubborn to admit what he is doing isn’t working, that is my biggest bone to pick with him. Yet, over, and over again, he does the same thing, and expects different results, that is just nuts !!!!!!!

      • Hatrick Swayze says:

        Walt, you cannot unequivocally say that we would have won if he shook up the defensive pairs. (I agree with you that necessary adjustments were lacking in both the 2014 and 2015 post seasons). It could have happened but let’s be realistic and admit we still may have lost. Honest assessment- would your opinion of the coach change?

        • Walt says:

          If any adjustments were indeed made, then he gets the respect due. When you wear blinders out of loyalty to some guys, and may, or may not, as you question, cost you a cup, then he deserves the criticism……………

    • Eddie!Eddie!Eddie! says:

      I 100% agree Dan.

      Walt, it’s true that Girardi had a tough series. But the Kings were a FAR better team than we were. They overwhelmed us with their size and they simply had more skill than we did. A singular adjustment involving Girardi likely doesn’t change anything.

      What would have changed the situation is if our scorers had actually showed up and scored. But as so often happens with this group, at least prior to this year, scoring big goals when it matters most doesn’t happen enough. Hank has to stand on his head to even give us a chance.

      Messier was interviewed last year and commented on this very thing. The Rangers have all the ingredients to win it all….except the inability to score big goals in post season. Perhaps this season, if healthy, the offense will actually show up for the playoffs for a change.

      Of course now, with our luck, the offense will be ready to shine but the defense won’t be good enough! That’s up to Gorton to fix.

      • Richter1994 says:

        If the officiating weren’t so against the Rangers (goalie interference and the awful Zuc tripping penalty, just to name 2 biggies that turned games)…

        If Nash doesn’t get unlucky by hitting Voynov’s stick shaft…

        If the Rangers just win one of the first two games…

        3 OT games on the road that could have gone either way…

        There is no doubt in my mind that if the Rangers win at least one of the first two then Game 3 is not the sleep walk loss that they had.

        • Hatrick Swayze says:

          Your sharp memory unearths forgotten truths buried in the depths of my dull mind. Oh the agony you have caused.

          • Richter1994 says:

            More like a nightmare my friend.

            I loved the media who said “see, Kings in 5!!”

            Yea, it wasn’t that easy for them and they had a lot of luck and bias going for them in that series.

        • Walt says:

          agree 100%, but again a little adjustments could have also gone a long way. Great post above…………

        • JoeS. says:

          That is exactly the reason I say that “luck” has a large role to play in the pursuit of the Cup. More so than any other sports championship!

        • Chris A says:

          Painful memories Richter, but spot on.

          That non call for goaltender interference in game 2 (I think it was game 2) was the stuff of nightmares. I think that was the go ahead goal for LA, as well.

        • paulronty says:

          I’ve said the same thing to my friends a hundred times, & it goes to prove that you need luck to win that Cup too. In fact, a scientific article I read in sports psychology, listed hockey as the game most effected by luck of the big four. You forgot the Kreider shot that beat Quick & hit the knob of his stick. Sigh.

          • Richter1994 says:

            yep guys. 🙁

            and Pablo, I even forgot about the Kreider shot as well. good memory.

      • Walt says:

        E3

        See post above, and keep defending this man !!!!!!

      • Jamie says:

        the Kings were better – as in they had a better approach throughout the games.

        I remember the Rangers getting early leads and then sitting back. That allowed the Kings to occupy our zone for long periods. The Rangers were a good possession team that year – I would have rather seen them try to play in the Kings’ zone more even with the lead.

        As for the Messier report – he really said we had all the ingredients to win? Does he watch our defense? hard to believe.

        • Eddie!Eddie!Eddie! says:

          He said that in a radio interview a year ago. No idea what he would say today.

        • paulronty says:

          What he really said was that the Rangers lacked the ability to impose their will on better teams, in a print article I read, which is not inconsistent with having the ingredients to win.

    • John B says:

      Why would we limit ourselves only to retread NHL coaches? There is plenty of good to great coaches out there in other leagues and in other levels that understand where the game is headed.

  11. Eddie!Eddie!Eddie! says:

    Here’s a thought for all of us to consider. What does this extension mean in terms of the Rangers trade deadline strategy?

    Consider this. Gorton signs AV to an extension mid season. That means even in the worst case scenario that the team epically unravels and somehow misses the playoffs, AV is back next year for sure and probably the following year. So that would suggest that the rest of this season and maybe even next season is NOT a mandate on the coach per se.

    So, does that mean that while certainly the Rangers will explore their options at the deadline, might they be thinking long term here? Maybe they feel they are a year or two away. Maybe they told AV they will get him the pieces he needs to win down the road, but this is not a “win now or else” situation at the moment.

    If so, Walt, that should make you happy. They may be thinking longer range than quick fix.

    I could be totally wrong about this. But clearly, a move of this nature is saying that with a young team, they believe AV is the guy to eventually mold them into a champion down the road more so than winning it all this season.

    • joe719 says:

      All good, but what about Lundqvist? Can you really, truly, be thinking long term when your goalie is obviously on the back end?—- Unless we’re talking real long term; and waiting for the Russian kid to get here.
      I think the extension is just a way to keep continuity within the organization. They’ve won under AV, haven’t had any real controversy under him and, even with their obvious flaws—they still are contenders. He needs to be recognized for that. I think the extension is just that.
      As for the long term strategy: that would be fine if they had the picks and the prospects worth waiting for. From what I know, I don’t ever remember reading about any sure-fire prospects in the pipeline. Just some more serviceable talent; that if all falls right, could turn out to be something.
      While they may not be looking for a quick fix at the deadline, I think they feel they have as good a shot as anyone and will act accordingly in any deal.
      Now, there is a game tonight and a rest of a Season to look forward to, right? Maybe now we can get back to addressing the needs of the team, and abandon the ‘dump AV’ stuff. Its been addressed—-hes the coach—–until further notice!!!! Live with it and move on!!!

      • paulronty says:

        Right on, it’s just like going to the toilet.

        • joe719 says:

          Kind of beneath you, no? Just because something pops in your head, doesn’t mean you need to share it with the world.

  12. pas44 says:

    Dan Marino never lifted up the Vince! He is still all world.

    If (and hopefully soon) AV lifts up Lord Stanley’s – this entire talk goes poof.

    He has improved this teams ability with a handcuffed defense. We are in a better place then Pitt was at this time last season. Gordon has been solid thus far.

    I’m gonna stay hopeful.

    If this team gets D, I think AV can bring it home.

    • John B says:

      “He has improved this teams ability with a handcuffed defense. We are in a better place then Pitt was at this time last season. Gordon has been solid thus far.”

      Know the big difference?

      Mike Sullivan recognized his defense corps wasn’t the best. He saw he had Letang and 5 others. Know what he did? He adjusted the style to limit the time that those defenseman were exposed and hemmed in the Pitt zone.

      Know what we do? The exact opposite.

      • pas44 says:

        Pitt brought in new D last year

        • John B says:

          Uh they did???

          They brought in Daley. A #2 Defenseman. We had Yandle, a #2 Defenseman (despite being played 3rd pair).

          Then they brought in Justin Schultz at the trade deadline???

          In what alternate reality does this explain Sullivan’s change of play in the Penguins 2 months prior?

          Again, Sullivan realized that he did not have a defense group that could survive long stretches of time in the defensive zone. He adapted and chose a style of play that kept the puck in the offensive zone through all 4 lines (So please no Malkin, Crosby etc crap. Those two didn’t play 45min a night a piece).

          What did we do? Rely on the “hail mary” breakout speed attack after long stretches of time in the defensive zone. How’d that work out for us?

      • paulronty says:

        Man, you are on a ROLL today sir!

      • Walt says:

        John, your becoming one of my favorite posters, you always hit the nail on the head !!!!!!!!!

  13. paulronty says:

    Lasciate ogni speranza, voi che entrate. New sign over the door to the Rangers dressing room.

  14. Andy says:

    I usually see extensions as the beginning of the end…never understand it but teams always seem to offer an extension before they fire someone..i am mostly fine with AV…he has his issue..but who doesn’t…

  15. tanto says:

    I disagree with a number of moves AV makes, especially with the defensive corp —- that said, he really hasn’t had much of a 6 man unit the last 2 years to work with. When he does, then maybe I’ll call for his head.

  16. Rangers_Underscore says:

    This could not happen to a better man. This would not happen to an honest man. This should not happen to a deserved man. This does happen because failure is a virtue to this team.

  17. rich s says:

    Don’t like the extension one bit…..
    Twice has gone into the postseason with arguably the best team [reg season top finish] and both times suffered disappointing losses. Other times brings a top 5 team into playoffs and loses. His teams NEVER overachieves!!!!!

    I blame him personally for allowing sather to cut anton strallman lose after showing he was our best defenseman in the playoffs…………

    Worst of all he seems incapable of making between periods adjustments when needed……and constantly has NO PLAN for how to stop Crosby or ovechkin etc etc…..

  18. rich s says:

    AV lacks the traits that a Messier , crosby, toews etc possess…..that is the mindset that- ‘this team will not be denied’ , ‘i will impose my will on this game’,
    ‘we will do whatever it takes’……….
    AV’s mindset seems to be ‘ we didnt play well’, ‘we werent good enough’., we need to improve’………
    Messier needs to be here to show this group of talented young stars ‘How to win’
    Imagine what he can do with kreider and miller and vesey -power forwards….

    • John B says:

      I disagree. I think Messier would be a horrible choice for a coach.

      The nature of the game and the playing style has substantially changed since Messier played. I think Messier would be a mix of AV and Torts, and not in a good way. The passion would be there, yes. But I’m not 100% sold that Messier understands where the game is headed.

      What separates great coaches from good coaches is the ability to see, decipher and adapt to where the game is GOING. Not where it is, but where it is headed.

      I would much rather find a younger coach who can think along of those lines instead of what was done in the past. I’m tired of these retread coaches in all professional leagues. Its starting to reek of nepotism.

      • paulronty says:

        John B> I think you vastly underestimate Mark Messier. Rich s is right, these young players would thrive under Messier’s tutelage. He’s way too smart to let the game pass him by.

  19. Eddie!Eddie!Eddie! says:

    Two interesting columns on the AV extension.

    http://www.thehockeynews.com/news/article/vigneault-now-third-highest-paid-coach-and-he-deserves-to-be-there

    https://newyork.cbslocal.com/2017/01/31/alain-vigneault-contract-new-york-rangers-brady-skjei/

    BTW, I havent seen one columnist yet that has criticized the move. That seems to be in the exclusive purview of some in the blogosphere.

    • paulronty says:

      That’s because mainstream journalists aren’t very prescient. Most analysts agree that mainstream media has deteriorated to the point of undermining democracy. You need to take a critical thinking course(The Great Courses has one). Because you haven’t heard one media type criticize, it does not follow that they are correct & those in the blogosphere are incorrect. Opinion is not truth.

      • Rangers_Underscore says:

        The media are there to push a position even if it isn’t true. read E3.

    • rich s says:

      We should have learned from the ‘ wikileaks, julian assange exposes ‘ that the media [aka 4th estate] is not doing its job……[in fact it hasn’t for over a hundred years since JP Morgan in 1915 bought americas 25 leading newspapers and used them as propaganda tools,] and hasnt been’ printing facts’ and ‘objectively reporting’ and instead just agree with the status quo in order to keep its jobs…….

      similarly most hockey writers dont seem to know as much as many hockey fans on this site and rarely criticize the organization lest they lose their ability to have access to the players and coaches…….