I pulled this from Jesse Spector's blog.
It's an excellent post-practice interview with Torts as he talks personnel and new challenges for the team. What is most important about the video is that one can tell Tortorella is more comfortable dealing with the press, and isn't hesitant to show some of his cards. Jump to see what I mean.....
In the video Tortorella speaks pretty candidly about how the team operates as a unit, and reveals some things about his philosophy on coaching. From the video Tortorella appears to subscribe to a less mechanistic view of coaching. For example, that chemistry among players, with an interest in the overall development of the team, is more important than the way players fulfill their "roles." I think you'd find that some of the working-class heroes on the Rangers like Prust and Boyle would agree that if they were treated as strictly role-players we'd not be seeing either, especially Prust, doing what we now expect them to do every night.
Torts alludes to this issue when Spector asks about the time constraints on older players' careers as the young-uns mature; and the way in which the team has to adapt without Cally but with MZA. We hear a lot about coaches in other sports excelling because they have to manage the egos of top flight talent while orchestrating who surrounds them. From this interview, we come to see that Torts doesn't view the Rangers in a plug-and-play or mold as-you-go manner.The players as persons are as important and changeable as the roles they are expected to fulfill. I don't mean this in terms of turning Michael Sauer into Drew Doughty, but that he coaches to let players grow into expanded roles.
From this interview the fans and the press get a real explanation as to why the lines change so much. It's not because he's looking for instant "jam," it's that he has a larger perspective on what a team is (and what this team is) that he hasn't let on to us until he put this out there. All the WTFs and pulled out hair from last year's line ups were not for naught.
on the other hand, i could be just plain wrong. My apologies if my argument is less than clear.