NHL execs, coaches and agents on fixing the Rangers: Fire Drury? Or Laviolette? Trades? Rebuild? Stay the course?

The question being asked a lot by fans, by us, by people around the league is this: Whats wrong with the New York Rangers ? There are plenty of ways to attack that question, even as a 4-1-1 run has started to allow them to recover after their 4-15-0 dive through late November and all of December.

Advertisement What weve tried here is a quick poll of nine people around the NHL four team executives, three agents and two longtime NHL coaches to hear what theyve seen so far and what they think of the Rangers going forward.

We granted all our respondents anonymity to allow them to speak freely about another team.

We also polled them over the last couple of weeks, during which the Rangers managed to at least temporarily stop their slide.

That could change a bit of the perspectives given below.

Will the Rangers make the playoffs? Yes: 4 No: 5 Even with the recent uptick, the Rangers are still under 35 percent to make the playoffs , so this breakdown from our survey group makes some sense.

Igor Shesterkin plays a big role on what our respondents think about a playoff run over the final 40 games; if he plays at a high level, thats a difference-maker in a crowded East playoff chase.

The fact that the Rangers are still in shouting distance after that awful stretch also shows how weak the wild-card race is.

But theres plenty of evidence from this season that the Rangers are broken.

Executive No.

1: I dont see it.

The chemistrys not there.

Theyve dug themselves a hell of a hole, and there isnt enough runway to get out of it.

Agent No.

1: I think they have a good chance.

For whatever crazy reason theyre in a big hole, as everyone knows, and I think theyll eventually get to the point where their true colors hopefully come out.

...

I think theyre better than the way theyre playing.

...

Unless (general manager Chris) Drury or the ownership decides to dismantle things now and tank it, get a nice pick.

That would be the only thing: if they move a body or two now or soon.

Coach No.

1: When youve been going bad for a month, its hard to see how they get out of it in time.

You cant just flush away 20, 25 games in a season and get right back into it.

Advertisement Executive No.

2: One word: Shesterkin.

So Ill say yes.

Whats the first thing you would fix on this Rangers team? None of our respondents are in the room with Drury, the coaching staff or the players, of course, so details about things that can happen internally with teams that have gone through what the Rangers have are tough to come by.

But every one of our respondents has worked with teams or players in situations like the Rangers current one, so they know what can cause issues on and off the ice.

Team defense was a major focal point for our group, especially the coaches.

Coach No.

2: Youd fix their defensive structure.

Thats not just D-zone coverage; its play away from the puck all over the ice.

Their turnovers are outrageous.

Agent No.

2: If I just said culture, am I offbeat? Im just from the outside, but there just always seems to be so much drama around the group.

Theres drama around the goaltenders contract.

Theres drama around the captain.

I just think the culture of the work environment creates mood, and mood creates momentum.

...

And that market.

You can have noise in Winnipeg, where the noise is only when youre at home.

Whereas with New York the noise seems to travel.

Executive No.

1: The core, for sure.

Somethings obviously amiss there.

Theyve gotten close, but they cant win with the group they have.

And then the D-zone play is right behind it.

They defend like its summer league most nights.

Executive No.

2: The (Jacob) Trouba thing was unfortunate.

With him, they certainly had an identity.

He wasnt fun to play against and you could overlook some of the other issues because he gave them that identity.

Thats what they need now with him gone.

Its a tough one to figure out.

If their better players were playing well, then you wouldnt have to fix much.

Who would you prioritize trading off the current Rangers roster? Almost all of our respondents can read and watch hockey, so theyve zeroed in on the two Rangers veterans most of us could identify as the teams top priorities to move in Chris Kreider and Mika Zibanejad .

Kreider is just about to return from an injured-reserve stint and Zibanejad has looked more like his old self the past two weeks, but those two are the focus.

Advertisement One respondent went a different route, however, as youll see.

Executive No.

1: Its Kreider or Zibanejad, and Id probably do Kreider first.

That wing spot is where they have some kids coming.

Theyve got (Will) Cuylle, who could do with more minutes.

Theyve got (Brennan) Othmann, who youd want to see get a chance.

(Gabe) Perreault coming soon.

Executive No.

3: I think given his age, what hes been through this season with his name being out there, Kreider should go.

Having said that, at his age and with his injury situation, Im not sure what a return would look like for him.

Likely not as high as you might hope for if youre them.

Agent 1: Id say probably (Zibanejad).

Hes the one guy who I would think has been underachieving or has potentially the most talent that maybe someone sees and feels that a change of scenery might be good for him.

I think a big return, a dangerous one, is KAndre (Miller).

Honestly, I dont think hes as smart (or) mean or has the upside or (is) driven, maybe, as what they thought.

I think thats a dangerous one because hes got so much upside, but I dont know if hell ever hit it.

I think theyre always going to be a little unhappy as big and raw as he is.

I dont think hell ever be that deep playoff, No.

1 defenseman that they want him to be, or No.

2 defenseman.

I think he could bring back a nice return.

Coach No.

2: You wonder about Zibanejad: Is it a player thing, a coach thing, where they dont see eye to eye? Is it bigger than that? Its got to be something.

Theres also a lot of miles on him and Kreider.

Is Peter Laviolette the right coach to get the team out of this tailspin? Only two clear no votes out of the nine people polled.

Thats what 827 coaching wins gets you.

Laviolette has made a few adjustments in recent weeks even after it looked like his players were going to tune him out for good, and the team has responded a bit.

Advertisement But, as many of our respondents noted, Laviolettes success in year one at his previous five NHL stops was not usually matched by sustained success.

So the clock is ticking.

Agent No.

1: Yes and no.

I think the guys really like him, and that doesnt necessarily mean hes the right guy, but theres obviously some trust there.

I think he could be a lot more assertive and not be their buddy, so Im shocked he hasnt been fired, especially by Drury, to get another bullet and not use it on himself.

Thats what I dont know behind the scenes with ownership and Drury.

But I think the guys like him, so for that reason, I would say yes.

But if you could get, in my opinion, Joel Quenneville in there, thats what I would do.

Executive No.

1: Id say no.

It looks like hes exhausted every move he can make.

It doesnt look like anythings working.

Executive No.

2: Yes, he is.

Peter Laviolettes not having as bad a year as most of his players.

Coach No.

2: Lavis a really knowledgable, prepared coach, and I think you need that when times get tough.

The only factor for me is if hes too rigid.

Hes got the guys hes got, and if they cant do what he needs them to do to get out of this, can he adapt? And how long do you stick with him with players not doing what they need to do? Executive No.

4: This guy has won more games than any other U.S.-born coach, and hes top-10 all-time.

Is he the right guy? I dont know.

Thats a lot of freakin wins.

Are there coaches who are better fits at certain times? For sure.

Does Peter have a shelf life? For sure.

Every coach has a shelf life.

Peters won a lot of games.

Hes a pretty good fing coach.

Is Chris Drury the right general manager to make the necessary changes? This one got lot of yes votes, as well, for the simple reason that Drury has already shown hes willing to make difficult decisions and live with the consequences.

The Trouba deal and the Barclay Goodrow move last summer excised two leaders from the room.

The teams response partly falls on the man who made those decisions, but Drury is moving ahead with a big remodel of a team that was two wins from a Cup Final last season.

Thats no small undertaking.

Advertisement Agent No.

1: I think he can, but I dont think hes safe.

Its hard with that ownership group to know how much of a puppet he is in this or how much say he has.

Im afraid he answers to the owner quite a bit.

Executive No.

1: How he did it was probably not the best way, but moving Goodrow and Trouba out and not retaining any salary are good moves.

You have someone like that in charge when changes have to be made, its probably a good thing.

Agent No.

2: He seems like he really works the job.

A lot of guys dont work the job.

He would either get them out of it or die trying.

I think he is (the right guy), but its always: How much time do you have to do it? Because thats quite a drastic fall, to go from last year to a playoff miss.

Drury, I think, has more scars on him in the last three months than he probably has had in his tenure (up to that point) on the job.

Before, he was almost Teflon.

Everything would bounce off him.

Executive No.

2: Theyve gone through so much turbulence, so much of it self-inflicted, but if they come out of it and Chris is willing to make some difficult changes, then I think it makes sense.

This isnt a West Coast team no one stays up to watch.

Its the Rangers.

When youre managing a team like that, it can be overwhelming.

Executive No.

3: Hard to say because hes never been through anything like this.

A lot of whats gone on there has been their own doing.

There were a lot of pieces there when he took over.

Hes been hit and miss with what hes tried to add to this core the last three years.

The real heavy lift begins now.

Do the Rangers need a full rebuild? Judging by our answers here, the real question should be: Does any team need a full rebuild these days? It was a resounding no across the board on the Rangers, who have Shesterkin in net, Adam Fox on the top defense pair and still plenty of skill up front.

No need to tear it all down even if this season continues south.

Advertisement Coach No.

1: Theyve got some good young players, they have a goalie.

Maybe a retool, but no way you need to rebuild that.

Theyve got a good team that lost their confidence because of what went on around them.

They didnt all turn into bad players overnight.

Executive No.

2: First, Im not sure how you do a full rebuild with so many no-trade clauses and so much term left on guys deals.

Its difficult to do and way more difficult to build back up.

When youve got Igor Shesterkin for eight more years, youre not doing a rebuild.

Executive No.

4: There are organizations out there who have been on a full rebuild for a long, long time, and theyve never finished the build.

Anybody can tear down a team.

Thats not hard.

Whats hard is to build, and building a roster is an art form.

You look at (some teams) you dont just tear it down and rebuild it.

You have to get the right pieces.

You have to be fortunate, too.

Agent No.

2: Id say no.

But I say that because rebuilds are impossible.

I just look at where their money is.

Its just too hard.

Whats a rebuild? Is it the core or is it all the periphery? (Top photo of Jonathan Quick : Bruce Bennett / Getty Images).

This article has been shared from the original article on theathleticuk, here is the link to the original article.