25 or so Questions:
I posted my original list of off-season questions the other day. Based on feedback, I added three questions, two provided by a reader on Twitter and one by TJ that was debated in the comments in that prior blog. In this blog, I cover question 17, quite cognizant that #16 is a major lightning rod topic, but one I think we have debated and discussed in the past, including in the prior several blogs.
As a reminder, to state the obvious and what should be remembered by many, we usually have entered the late-spring and summer with more questions than answers. This year was clearly no different, though in this case, a good portion of the offseason questions have already been answered. With the slight delay in posting these queries, I took some poetic license and included the questions we likely had when the season ended, even if they have already been answered. Like I have done in year's past, I throw this one to you, asking for you to provide your questions, which I will incorporate in the blogs to carry us through the summer.
1) Will and should Gerard Gallant be fired?
2) If Gallant is let go, should the Rangers target a young coach or retread?
3) Which of the team's free agents - if any - would you bring back?
4) Is Jaroslav Halak the best option as the back up goalie?
5) Is Filip Chytil a center or a winger? if a center, should he center the second line?
6) Has Artemi Panarin's playoff struggles soured you on him enough that he should be dealt?
7) Any concerns that Mika Zibanajed is not a playoff performer and puts up his numbers mainly on the PP and against weaker opponents?
6) Did Alexis Lafreniere show enough 5x5 to be moved to the top-six and do you view him as a first line right winger? How many years and how much salary would you sign him to in his next contract?
8) Should New York add a veteran blueliner or try Zac Jones or Matthew Robertson as the sixth d-man?
0) Will Brennan Othmann and/or Will Cuylle be given a REAL chance to make the squad this summer or will the Rangers opt to not rush the youngsters? Both are on their ELCs and are listed as LW. If they do make the roster, then who gets moved out?
11) Are the Rangers built to compete for the Stanley Cup? What about compared to Carolina or New Jersey for the division?
12) How do you want the third and/94 fourth lines to look? Do they need to be a traditional bottom-six or should the third line be more of a scoring line?
13) Who would you have targeted in free agency given the minimal cap space available?
14) Is K'Andre Miller worth a long-term deal? Would you go one year and then sign him to an extension in January with the cap rising? How about a two-year deal with a $4 mil cap hit?
15) What's the biggest gap/issue with the team that needs to be fixed for them to be a true Cup contender?
16) To what extent do you think analytics should be used in roster/line/pair decisions? (Mark Weissman)
17) Do you think too much emphasis is put on what other orgs are doing? (by mgmt? coaches? players? fans?) (Mark Weissman)
18) What will be/should be the power play deployment based on the current roster (TJ)
More to come
The question covered in this blog is:
17) Do you think too much emphasis is put on what other orgs are doing? (by mgmt? coaches? players? fans?) (Mark Weissman)
Mark asks an interesting question. It’s one that I think we have kind of tangentially covered in the past, maybe not as separate question, but a topic embedded in other columns. His question has four separate components to it with each aspect possibly having a different answer. I provide mine below, would like your opinion.
Management - the NHL - as we know - is a copycat league. You could argue sports on general is the same way. If an idea or style of play has worked to win a championship, almost immediately that becomes the end all and be all. I hearken you back to our last blog when the topic of conversation was Vegas’ size on the blue line, vis-a-vis whether Zac Jones should be the favorite for the open LH D spot. This is just the most recent example where a lineup construction may be the model moving forward.
Whether or not we like or agree if that strategy is the optimal, teams will adopt this for their squads. I can get on board with this to an extent but management should build their teams slightly factoring in what has worked elsewhere but cognizant of what might be good for that organization may not work for theirs. Don’t be a slave to what other teams have done, unless you have the same type of players already or it fits what the coaching staff and/or GM believes makes sense for the roster.
Coaches - I group coaches in with management. It’s rare where you will have a disconnect between the two groups. If that happens, usually the coach is either overruled or on the outside looking in after losing the battle with upper management. The coaching community is a small industry. There is substantial inbreeding and regurgitation amongst the population, as seen by how many retreads are hired, including the current and prior coach in New York.
What should be different is that since coaches are so close, there is the opportunity to learn, borrow or steal from your compatriots. This is especially so from younger coaches, who have fresh ideas that can be brought on board to improve how the team operations. Drills, practice, line deployment and configurations, breakouts and zone exits to name a few are areas where existing coaches can learn from new ones. My hope is Peter Laviolette leverages the knowledge of Michael Peca and Don Muse to incorporate new ways of doing things rather than what’s views as tried and true.
Players - the power base has shifted in all sports leagues. In past, coaches and management held the cards. Now, it’s the players. A player or group of players can get a coach fired. Look at what happened with the Rangers. Post-season meetings between the GM and players highlighted issues with Gerard Gallant. While that might not have been the only reason Gallant was let go, it certainly sealed and reinforced GM Chris Drury’s decision.
Since there is so much player movement, it’s almost impossible for there not to be knowledge of what other organizations are doing. Good organizations should be listening to their players, adapting what might be a prevailing view, as long as not an anathema to how they operate, to create the best working environment. Don’t just make a change to be a follower but pick and choose to improve the status quo.
Fans - the grass is always greener on the other side. We do a great job of picking at the flaws of our team and think other organizations do it better. That said, certain teams are well run and we know which ones they are. If those teams have success, it’s not a stretch to think or want our organization to mirror what those squads have done or operate. It’s human nature especially when the issues with the Rangers are fairly well known amongst the fan base.
Wanting to take the best parts of another organization should not be viewed as a negative. In fact, team management should think of this as a good thing because the end goal is the same, a Stanley Cup. Of course, this is great in theory, but in practice, it’s likely thought of as stepping on toes. Internal management, especially in New York, operate on the notion that what they do is right and no one else could do it better. This modus operandi correctly concerns us.
What say you?
New York Rangers Blogger • 
Join the Discussion:
»