June 16, 2014
Nash for Spezza over Stastny

Using Capgeek’s Armchair GM with a Cap ceiling at 70.6M (common number I’ve seen), and Larry Brook’s projection on what players will get this offseason, here’s where the Rangers stand:

Either having to lose Boyle and Stralman and possibly someone else like Dom Moore or John Moore to be able to have a chance at signing Stastny, or keeping Boyle, hoping Stralman comes back, letting JT Miller play 3rd line C and moving Step and Brass up to top 2 C’s respectively. But here’s a third option. One that is rather polarizing. Trading Rick Nash for Jason Spezza or Dustin Byfuglien.

Look, Rick Nash not producing in the playoffs and his production overall is only a small piece of why I want to get rid of him. This past season he did have 9 game winning goals, a Rangers record. But none of those came against playoff teams and only 8 of his 26 goals did come against playoff teams. He hasn’t produced in the playoffs his whole career. Not only that, he makes 7.8M and is now a concussion away from being done. It’s visible how his last concussion has changed his game. He doesn’t drive to the net as much, his hands have cemented a little bit, and we all know there are regular season games where he is non existent. And worrying about him getting a concussion isn’t that ridiculous because of his two in a matter of a 6 months or so. If he gets one more concussion, we are likely stuck with a 7.8M guy who is a complete shell of himself. But if you can work out a trade for Jason Spezza who, with one year left on his contract and at 31 years old, will look to have a career year in order to get one more big contract could be the perfect guy not just for right now but also for the future. We save 7M for 4 years by making that trade.

Make this trade and hope Ryan Callahan comes back on a 5yr/23-25M deal. After this coming season you lose Sepzza and St. Louis giving you 12M to spend on our own guys and maybe bringing back a guy like Dubinsky. Or maybe you get extremely lucky and either Kane or Toews doesn’t re-sign. Doubtful. Let’s just look at over the next two years bringing back Dubinsky and Callahan. Or even Justin Williams who is a free agent after next season.

And all that is just bonus to me. I think we can all agree that there is a little bit more likelihood that Rick Nash ends up hurting us more than helping us down the line. Bringing in Spezza allows you to be more financially stable down the road while also bringing in a guy who has 52 points in 56 career playoff games, a guy who could very well have a career year, a guy who is still productive, a guy who wants to win a Stanley Cup. The Rangers will have one more run at a Cup next year before they will have to retool a little bit and rebuild the organizational depth. If Nash has a bad year or gets one concussion, you are stuck with him for the rest of his contract.

You could also try to trade for Byfuglien instead of Spezza. No doubt he’ll give us size, power, a power play QB we desperately need, and offense. Not to mention he’s even cheaper than Spezza and has one more year than him on his contract.

Trading Rick Nash right now, this offseason, is what’s best for the New York Rangers and their future and this upcoming season.

May 15, 2014
Brad Richards or Rick Nash? Who to Buyout

Brad Richards is old and slowing down. He isn’t going to be a consistent 20 goal scorer or 50 assist guy. Hell I doubt he’s even a number one center anymore and really he might be better served being a 3rd line C and having Kredier-Stepan-St.Louis and Zucc-Brassard-Pouliout as your top 2 lines. Your 3rd line being Hagelin-Richards-Miller. The question for buying out Richards is whether or not you believe Stepan and Brassard can be a good top 2 centers. Personally, I think if you’re going to buyout Richards, you have to trade Hagelin and restructure you’re 3rd line to be more physical and like a 4th line with offensive upside. I’d wonder if Chicago would do Hagelin for Bickell and we can sign a guy like Steve Ott.

Rick Nash is non-existent and he’s a concussion away from being a non-factor. He does absolutely nothing in the playoffs and is essentially just a good penalty killer now. I don’t want to pay 7.8M for a penalty killer. He would’ve scored 30g this season had he played a whole year and he set the record for most game winning goals in a season for the Rangers. But he does absolutely zero in the playoffs and you can’t trade him without taking somewhere between 30-50% of his salary.

Brad Richards brings leadership, clutch performances in the playoffs, key goals, and a solid mentor for younger players. It’s a lot to pay for a 3rd liner or possible 2nd liner. But you have to ask yourself now, who is more beneficial to let go. In short, Richards is more costly but brings more to the table than Nash. However, How long is his skill going to make the intagibles worth that much money? But then again, is worth the 7.8M to keep Nash who, if he gets one more concussion, might not play again. It’s going to be a really tough decision for the New York Rangers and they have to get rid of one of them.

So who would you keep and why?

January 8, 2014
A Few Thoughts and Epiphanies From This Season

1) This Rangers fan base has made a turn for the worse. This is not the Rangers fan base I know and love, and Twitter has opened my eyes to that. I see people wishing for injuries, totally biased views, idiotic faith, disapproval of reality, and most importantly I’ve seen a lack of knowledge. Now I’m not saying the Rangers are the only fan base like this. Every fan base is, for the majority, stupid and idiotic mostly because of the outrageous passion. But that’s one reason I used to be so proud of being a New York Rangers fan. I could always count on my fellow Rangers fans to have a capable and knowledgeable discussion about hockey without having a completely biased view. I’ve got news for you Rangers fans, we are not the end all, be all of sports fans. We have the luxury of having the WORLD’s most famous arena. Of course we will sell out even when we are bad because tourists would like nothing more than to come in and watch a game at the Garden. Now that I’m going to school with people from all over the world, I see that. People will go to a game regardless of whether or not they like the sport just to say they’ve been to the Garden. Which brings me to my next point.

2) Madison Square Garden is all hype now. When I was a kid, man there was no better place to watch a game. Were there some spots with limited viewing? Yes. But you know what, the bathrooms were a luxury, sitting up top was a joy not a nightmare, and because each section was so compact, it was like a tight nit group of old friends. Now you’re section is massively spread out, it takes forever to get back to your seat, and if you’re sitting next to two overweight people, settle in and have your buddies get you as much beer as possible because it’s going to be a rough night. I’ve almost gotten into two altercations in the last month and a half sitting up top. Before the renovations, I witnessed maybe one fight a year and I had the luxury of being able to go 10-15 times a year because of season tickets. But James Dolan has completely and officially fucked the blue collar fan. Tensions increase because the team is not that good, the experience is a ball busting hassle, and the people just don’t give a shit. Back before the renovation, if you started arguing with a fan of an opposing team (especially to help out one of your friends or parents) at least 2 or 3 other guys would help you out because you knew them. You saw them all the time. It was almost like an extended family. But those days are gone along with the ghosts that sent chills up my spine when I walked those hallways.

3) I’m getting sick and tired of all the bullshit fighting. When did somebody having an opinion of their own become a crime? I’m sorry, but if the team is 0-16 to start the season do I still need to think they are going to win the Cup to be considered a loyal fan? If that’s the case then fuck off, I’m out because that’s bullshit. I will root for this team until I’m blue in the face but I’m allowed to think we won’t succeed if I truly believe we won’t. And if I’m wrong then I’ve never been happier to have been wrong. If I think our goalie sucks and he isn’t worth the contract, show me the contract I signed to be a Rangers fan that says I have to think a certain way about a certain player. You tell me why I have to hold my tongue when I think our team is being mishandled. You tell me why thinking that building the team around a 31 year old goalie making 8.5M a year, in a world where a great offense and a good defense gets you a title and not the other way around, is an illogical, stupid, and brain dead opinion.

4) In closing, I hope things change because I really don’t know how much longer I can take of this team, this ownership, this fan base.

December 4, 2013
Wrong Move Re-Signing Hank

Hear me out on this. For once in your lives don’t shoot a person for having an opinion. I love Henrik Lundqvist. He’s easily the best New York Rangers player I’ve ever had the pleasure of watching live and being able to comprehend his talent and dedication. Pre-Lockout I would’ve signed him to this deal in a heartbeat. However, in the Post-Post-Lockout Era with a chokehold salary cap for 3 years, I would’ve traded him.

First, let’s take a look at the salary cap projections for the next 10 years according to James Mirtle of the Globe and Mail (a Toronto based News Outlet)

2012-13: 70.2M

2013-14: 64.3M

2014-15: 64.3M

2015-16: 66.1M

2016-17: 69.5M

2017-18: 73.1M

2018-19: 76.9M

2019-20: 80.9M

2020-21: 85.1M

2021-22: 89.5M

So in 10 years it could up to almost 90M. But by the time it increases above the cap room for this current season, Henrik Lundqvist will be 36 years old making 8.5M. The cap decreases for the two most important years for the Rangers in that we have the most guys reaching the end of their contracts in 2013-14 offseason and 2014-15 offseason. With this move we are likely losing Girardi and/or Callahan or a handful of our young guys. Now was the time to trade Hank for a good 20-25 goal scorer and some draft picks/prospects and rebuild in these next two offseasons so that come 2017-18, we have a team that’s grown together and developed together and more than enough cap space to start spending again.

Now here’s my major argument. In today’s NHL, you can’t win paying your goalie more than 5M a year in cap hit. Don’t believe me? Only two players since the 04-05 lockout have had a cap hit of no more than 5M and won a Cup. Tim Thomas was one but he had Tukka Rask playing a good portion of the season to rest him, and Marc-Andre Fleury was the other but he Crosby and Malkin and a bunch of other really talented players. Of the 6 goalies to win since that lockout, 4 have had a cap hit of 3.5M or higher and only 2 have exceeded 4M. Antti Niemi had a cap hit of 3.8M this past season but 826k his first Cup. Jean-Sebastien Giguere had a cap hit of 3.9M when he won the Cup. But Jonathan Quick only had a 1.8M, Osgood only had a 900K, and Gerbver only had 1.064M cap hit. Henrik’s first major deal (signed back in 2008-09) payed him 6.875M in cap hits. His new deal will cost us 8.5M. Both exceed any cap hit of every goalie to win a cup since the Lockout.

You want my opinion on what I would’ve done? See if I could trade Girardi and Henrik Lundqvist for either Taylor Hall or Jordan Eberle, a prospect, and a first round pick. Or trade them to Colorado for Parenteau, Duchene, and a first. Or trade them to Phoenix along with Del Zotto for Mike Smith, Keith Yandle, and a first. How about those 3 to San Jose for Pavelski, Hertl, and Niemi? What about to Winnipeg for Byfuglien, Pavelec, and a 3rd/4th liner?

I don’t know how feasible any of those moves are. But you can make easy cases for why they work for both teams and benefit both teams. And all of those trades create a bit more cap space for the Rangers while also giving us arguably more depth than any team in the NHL and so much talent.

All in all, I think trading Henrik Lundqvist and even Dan Girardi in a package would’ve been the best thing for the New York Rangers and their future. I would’ve hated seeing Hank and Girardi in another uniform, but I’m also going to hate people bitching and moaning abou Hank when he’s 36 and making 8.5M for another like 3 seasons when he’s not the same player. And at that point you won’t be able to trade him. This was the wrong move. The only other way I see this working out is at 2015 draft you trade every pick you have in that draft and two more first rounders for the first overall pick to get Connor McDavid and build around him. But that won’t happen.

June 15, 2013
Alain Vigneault: Skepticism

Will AV fix our offense? Most likely. Will he fix our powerplay? Most likely. Will he change the culture of the team? More than most likely. Will he keep his players on a tight enough leash to actually win? Less likely. From what I’ve read, he’s known to cater to players and have a long leash. I’m not saying he’s anything close to Boudreau or guys like Rex Ryan. But, there’s got to be a reason he couldn’t get the best out of his very solid Canucks team and get them out of the 2nd round except for one year.

In my debates about Vigneault vs. Ruff, people have brought up that Vigneault just had players underperform. “He would’ve done something if Luongo actually came to play.” some have said. But as I’ve seen, we’ve all agreed it’s the coaches job to get the best out of his players. Tortorella got fired because he couldn’t get the most out of Gaborik, Richards, and even Nash in the playoffs.

Will the Rangers now be more open? Yes. Will the Rangers now be more exciting? Most likely. Could he win? Yes. Do I personally think he will win with the Rangers? No. Do I hope I’m wrong? More than anything in the world. And all of this isn’t to say I hate Vigneault or am unwilling to even give him a chance.  My skepticism about him is his playoff performances. So don’t expect to see me hating on him unless the Rangers are like 10 games under .500. But if the Rangers can’t get out of the 2nd round next year? You will definitely hear me say things like “this is what I was talking about”. I won’t be calling for his head after one year but if he can’t reach a Conference Final in his first 3 years, I’ll start calling for his job.

But with all this said, AV was one of two guys I believe gave the Rangers the best chance at going to a Stanley Cup Final that were available to be head coach. He was probably the best coach available. But New York is a different animal and I don’t know if he has the personality or mentality that it takes to win the big one in this town. Hopefully I’m wrong and good luck to you Alain.

June 14, 2013
Lindy Ruff is Right Fit

christopherkreider:

nyrangersnation:

Love him or hate him, Boomer Esiaspn brought up a TREMENDOUS point about coaching, in any sport, in New York City. You have to be tough on players and you have to keep then in line. Coughlin, Parcells, Keenan, Torre, all winners with a few having multiple titles. Ryan, Edwards, Fassel, Renney, Kotite, all couldn’t get it done.

With that being the case, Lindy Ruff is the perfect fit for the New York Rangers. He isn’t as abrash as Tortorella or as, for lack of a better word, dickish as Torts. Actually, no, dickish works. But he still has that, no BS, blue collar way about him. More importantly, he played with Messier, Richter, Leetch, and Graves in one of three of the organizations most successful seasons in the past 23 years. According to John Vogl of the Buffalo News, the job title of Head Coach of the New York Rangers has been a frequent thought in the mind of Lindy Ruff. This is the team he wants to coach and he is dying for a cup.

Lindy Ruff brought a team of forwards HEADED by Michael Peca and Miroslav Satan, (Michael Peca even came out and said Ruff would work well for New York. Coming from a guy that didn’t do much after leaving his tutelage, that carries some weight) to a Stanley Cup Finals appearance due in large part to Hasek and defense.

Maybe that’s where the “Lindy Rufff is just as defensive-minded as Tortorella” statements come from? But after the 2004-2005 lockout, with much more offense at his disposal, he coached a team that has 3 or 4 Top 5 finishes offensively with a season leading the league in goals for. But alas, despite having another workd class goalie in Ryan Miller, he had very little defensively to work with and help Miller out.

With the New York Rangers, he has young forwards with tons of potential at his disposal and a world class scorer in Rick Nash. He has one of the best defensive corps in the league, especially if Staal can regain full vision or we pull off a trade for the Canes 5th overall pick and draft his future replacement, and he has the best goalie in the league.

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that he is the coach the New York Rangers both need and deserve right now. He knows how to win with unbalanced teams, he wants to win, he wants to coach here. To me there is no better fit than Lindy Ruff.

To make things a tad more interesting, Ruff last played for the New York Rangers in the 1991-92 season which is very comparable to our 2011-12 season. Then came our decline year followed by a Stanley Cup that Ruff missed out on.

Alain Vigneault is I’m sure, an excellent coach and will thrive somewhere that isn’t New York. But he won 6 Division titles in a weak division while Ruff was coaching in one of the more difficult divisions. Since their tenures post-lockout, 40% of Western Conference playoff teams were from Vigneault’s division while 57% of Eastern Conference playoff teams (the tougher conference in my opinion) came from Lindy Ruff’s division.

Numbers don’t lie folks and all the numbers point to one man, Lindy Ruff.

Ruff having played for the Rangers 2+ decades ago with guys like Leetch & Co. means absolutely nothing. There isn’t anything interesting there that should hold any weight when considering a new head coach. It’s a novel factoid, but that’s about it. He’s supposed to be looking at the head coaching job, not to meet up with some old buddies. And what does Peca know about who would be a good fit for the Rangers, or make what he says somehow credible? He has even less ties to the organization than Ruff.

Read More

Okay, thank you for bringing actual numbers into that. I appreciate the research you did on this. My point on Vigneault and the division titles is that He had roughly 48 games a year against at best average teams. Ruff had 48 games a year against very tough teams. Ruff would miss the playoffs a few years by 4 points and 2 points but he would’ve easily made the playoffs had he been in the Western Conference. 

My point on playing for the Rangers was just an interesting storyline tidbit. It has no swaying in my opinion on whether or not he has the ABILITY to coach the team. Just an interesting little factoid I thought was amusing.

As for you point on Peca and Satan, you say they had 5 productive seasons under Ruff. Look at what they did after that and he shows he get’s production out of his stars. We remember Peca and Satan being not that great for the Islanders but they were 30-40 goal scorers with Ruff coaching. And yes, he never had absolutely horrendous defense, but he never had the defense we have here while also having the offense we have here. Hasek never had a deep offense to bail him out and Miller never had defense to bail him out. 

Ruff also turned Gerbe into an effective offensive prodcuer and gave Grigorenko every opportunity to thrive. I fully believe in his ability to coach young talent and how many coaches can we honestly say can handle injuries?

Now for Vigneault, he coached in a sub-par division in the weaker conference. He never had to deal with a Crosby-Malkin or Ovechkin or Chara and so on. Granted, there is some talent in the West especially with Detroit and now Chicago. However, it doesn’t match up to the depth and talent in the Eastern Conference. Ruff made 4 Conference Finals and one Stanley Cup Final in the tougher conference while Vigneault made just one Stanley Cup Final and that was the only year he was able to get a team out of the 2nd round.

Not to mention personalities. Vigneault is known to be more of a players coach and gives his players a long leash. That doesn’t work in New York. It never has, and it never will regardless of the sport. Ruff knows how to communicate with his players better than Tortorella does but he also knows how to push them. Was he fired? Yes. Is it most likely because he could no longer get through to his players? Yes. But he was there for almost a decade and a half with two different nuclei. Not to mention he’s been coaching in a tough division in a tough conference that happens to be our own. So he knows the Bruins more than Vigneault, he knows the Maple Leafs more than Vigneault, he knows the Canadiens more than Vigneault, and he knows the teams in our division more than Vigneault.

Either way, I appreciate you actually bringing something to the table.

June 12, 2013
Lindy Ruff is Right Fit

Love him or hate him, Boomer Esiaspn brought up a TREMENDOUS point about coaching, in any sport, in New York City. You have to be tough on players and you have to keep then in line. Coughlin, Parcells, Keenan, Torre, all winners with a few having multiple titles. Ryan, Edwards, Fassel, Renney, Kotite, all couldn’t get it done.

With that being the case, Lindy Ruff is the perfect fit for the New York Rangers. He isn’t as abrash as Tortorella or as, for lack of a better word, dickish as Torts. Actually, no, dickish works. But he still has that, no BS, blue collar way about him. More importantly, he played with Messier, Richter, Leetch, and Graves in one of three of the organizations most successful seasons in the past 23 years. According to John Vogl of the Buffalo News, the job title of Head Coach of the New York Rangers has been a frequent thought in the mind of Lindy Ruff. This is the team he wants to coach and he is dying for a cup.

Lindy Ruff brought a team of forwards HEADED by Michael Peca and Miroslav Satan, (Michael Peca even came out and said Ruff would work well for New York. Coming from a guy that didn’t do much after leaving his tutelage, that carries some weight) to a Stanley Cup Finals appearance due in large part to Hasek and defense.

Maybe that’s where the “Lindy Rufff is just as defensive-minded as Tortorella” statements come from? But after the 2004-2005 lockout, with much more offense at his disposal, he coached a team that has 3 or 4 Top 5 finishes offensively with a season leading the league in goals for. But alas, despite having another workd class goalie in Ryan Miller, he had very little defensively to work with and help Miller out.

With the New York Rangers, he has young forwards with tons of potential at his disposal and a world class scorer in Rick Nash. He has one of the best defensive corps in the league, especially if Staal can regain full vision or we pull off a trade for the Canes 5th overall pick and draft his future replacement, and he has the best goalie in the league.

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that he is the coach the New York Rangers both need and deserve right now. He knows how to win with unbalanced teams, he wants to win, he wants to coach here. To me there is no better fit than Lindy Ruff.

To make things a tad more interesting, Ruff last played for the New York Rangers in the 1991-92 season which is very comparable to our 2011-12 season. Then came our decline year followed by a Stanley Cup that Ruff missed out on.

Alain Vigneault is I’m sure, an excellent coach and will thrive somewhere that isn’t New York. But he won 6 Division titles in a weak division while Ruff was coaching in one of the more difficult divisions. Since their tenures post-lockout, 40% of Western Conference playoff teams were from Vigneault’s division while 57% of Eastern Conference playoff teams (the tougher conference in my opinion) came from Lindy Ruff’s division.

Numbers don’t lie folks and all the numbers point to one man, Lindy Ruff.

June 4, 2013
Rangers Nation: Henrik Lundqvist: Why it's Not Outrageous to Trade Him

kappykoivu:

nyrangersnation:

Henrik Lundqvist is one of the best goalies I’ve ever seen. Henrik Lundqvist is one of the best Rangers I’ve ever seen. But trading him might be the right move for the future of this New York Rangers team.

Henrik Lundqvist is 30 years old. He is playing a negotiating game with Sather. He could…

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA GRANLUND. EVERYONE KNOWS FLETCHER WOULDN’T TRADE MIKKE YET.

For the best goalie in the league who’s only struggles has never having an offense in front of him? Minnesota has a good well of prospects. You get a world-class goalie like Hank and you’ve got at least a 5th seed. But you can’t get Hank without giving up a high-quality player or two.

(via officialfinland)

June 3, 2013
Henrik Lundqvist: Why it’s Not Outrageous to Trade Him

Henrik Lundqvist is one of the best goalies I’ve ever seen. Henrik Lundqvist is one of the best Rangers I’ve ever seen. But trading him might be the right move for the future of this New York Rangers team.

Henrik Lundqvist is 30 years old. He is playing a negotiating game with Sather. He could potentially be moving on from New York.

Hank just had a kid. I’m sure it won’t be the last. We don’t know what goes on in his house and for all we know, his wife could want to move somewhere smaller, somewhere warmer, or somewhere else. The suburbs are nice! But what if Hank just likes a city more?

The point is that theres no guarantee Hank comes back and even if he does, do you really want to sign a 30 year old GOALIE to a 7 year deal? And a goalie that can’t carry a team through a post-season, and a goalie who spent most of his first 5 years or so, playing 70+ games a year. I see us having one, maybe two good chances at a Cup by signing Hank.

There’s 3 teams we could trade him too that could turn our franchise around. St. Louis, Minnesota, and Florida all need goaltending. We could probably get Huberdau, their 1st and Markstrom from Florida by giving up Hank, a future 1st, and a prospect like Fasth or Bourque. That means we’re getting a future stud winger, either MacKinnon or Drouin, and a future good goalie. We could take Tarasenko and a 1st and 2nd from St. Louis for just Lundqvist. We could take Granlund, a 1st, and Jared Spurgeon or Matthew Dumba from Minnesota. All of those trades put us in a position to probably have 3 great chances at a Cup and 2 good chances at a Cup in the next 7-10 years.

I am in no way saying the Rangers HAVE to do this. I’m saying they HAVE to look into it and gauge how feasible this is. It’s been about 7 years with Hank and we haven’t been able to close. Given what we have, I just don’t see it working unless he’s willing to take a lower cap hit and a 5 year deal. I LOVE Hank. But I’m a fan of the Rangers and I think this gives us a better and brighter future.

As always, feel free to disagree. My opinions no better than yours.

June 1, 2013
My Thoughts on Alain Vigneault

According to Canucks Army, his pros are modern strategic thinking, gets the most out of his stars, matchups juggernaut, player development, racks up the wins despite adversity. His cons are tactically stubborn, handling the media, treatment of young talent, too conservative with the lead, dealing with injured players. I’m also going to throw playoff woes in there as well. You had one of the 3 best goalies in the league and one of the best all-around teams and were notorious for playoff chokes.

Let’s start by addressing the cons. Tactically stubborn, now it says he basically refused to change his style in playoff series due to his stubbornness. The example they use is last year’s VAN-LA series where he wouldn’t change his matchups. Next is his handling of the media. I don’t care how my team’s coach acts towards the media. If you want to call them bunch of meatheads, fine. Just…win…games. From what I’ve read most of his trouble with the media stems from his dealing of the French language which angers people in a French-Canadian area. He only responds in French when asked in French. The last time I checked, not too many French speaking hockey fans in the New York area. The treatment of young talent scares me and confuses me considering one of his pros is player development. I’m not really in for another year of watching Kreider be mishandled. The too conservative with the lead con is also a huge note in my book. It worked for the Rangers in 2011-12 because they had shot blockers and grit to wear down opponents. Dump and chase style worked once you got the lead. But the Rangers need a change and I don’t think that change can mean getting Hank a lead and then falling back on his talent. That’s pretty much what we do now and it isn’t working for us or Hank. Dealing with injured players is an average worry for me so I’m not worried enough to be scared off by that con.

In my own assessment, Vigneault is a good head coach and he fits this Rangers team. If he can get the most out of Staal, Nash, and any other big name free agents we sign or future stars we develop as well as develop guys like Stepan, Kreider, Miller, Hagelin, etc into all-stars or actual stars, then I’m not complaining or shying away from this guy. However, playoff record scares me a lot and his coaching style will need to be altered slightly.

I like Vigneault and think he can very well succeed here in New York. But I’m going to put him as the number 2 candidate on my list.