I sincerely doubt there will be an emotional, knee-jerk reaction from president/general manager Chris Drury in the wake of the rubble left after the Rangers’ disastrous Game 7 performance in New Jersey.

That is not the way Drury operates. He is methodical. He will not act on impulse in regard to the coaching situation or the player personnel. The first-round ouster by the Devils will be analyzed carefully, not emotionally. It is likely better for Drury to step back and count to 10 — slowly — before reaching conclusions.

After all, he is not a columnist.

This is a rhetorical question because I don’t have the answer: What is the head coach to do when, perhaps with one exception, his team’s best skaters don’t play well in the playoffs?

The one exception would be Chris Kreider, who sullied his six-goal output that equaled a franchise record for goals in a series with a dreadful, minus-4 seventh game that he called “shameful.”

Folks will talk plenty about Gallant’s failure to make adjustments the way Devils coach Lindy Ruff — a former New York assistant under both Alain Vigneault and David Quinn who, by the way, was never a candidate to succeed AV when Vigneault was fired following the 2017-18 season — did in switching his line combinations a few times after being routed at home in both Games 1 and 2.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t Gallant roasted throughout the season for changing his line combinations too often? Plus this: If the deck chairs are broken, rearranging them does not solve the problem. They’re still broken.

Yes, the Devils adjusted their penalty kill after the Rangers had gone 4-for-10 in the first two games with additional pressure at the points of attack, but opponents had been doing that all season.

The failure to respond to that strategy is on a first power-play unit that went 1-for-19 over the final five games while yielding two shorthanded goals. The five guys on the first unit — Adam Fox, Artemi Panarin, Mika Zibanejad, Kreider and either Patrick Kane or Vlad Tarasenko — huddled regularly at practice, discussing strategy and options.

They never found one that worked.

Mailbag

In the aftermath of the Rangers’ Game 7 loss to the Devils, we solicited questions from followers of our Texts From the Blue Seats conversation. (Sign up here to start getting Rangers texts.) The Post’s Mollie Walker has some answers.

What happened?
—  Everyone

That is the question, isn’t it? The Rangers had been waiting for the postseason since the fall. And once they got there, a majority of the team didn’t show up in three of the seven games, which included two shutouts. At times, the Rangers looked more like a collection of stars than a team. The 2-0 series lead allowed them to get comfortable and feel as if the rest of the first round was going to be a breeze.

The Devils made outstanding adjustments, to their defense and in goal, and steadily improved as the series progressed. It gave them the necessary confidence to seize the opportunity in front of them and knock off the Broadway Blueshirts, who had one of the most talented lineups the organization has seen in a while.

Will Gallant be fired?
— Also everyone

Does Gallant have a chance to survive?
— Frank Roethel, Corey Shaw, Richard Ramsey

A first-round exit in the playoffs when the team is expected to do much more is one thing, but to get bounced from Round 1 the way the Rangers did is something entirely different.

Scoring two goals in their four losses is completely unacceptable. The no-show offensive performances in Games 5 and 7 were embarrassing for such a star-powered lineup. It’s up to the players to deliver, but when a team doesn’t get up for the biggest games of the year, piercing glances are directed at the coach.

Even if, as my colleague Larry Brooks noted above, there are reasons for the loss that Gallant could not control, it’s possible he will not be behind the Rangers’ bench next season strictly because someone will have to answer for the way this postseason unfolded.

That said, there’s certainly an argument for Gallant to stay. Back-to-back 100-plus-point seasons hardly warrants a changing of the guard, but playoffs are really the only thing that matters. The Rangers’ conference final finish last season is still on Gallant’s résumé, but to regress the way the team did this season does not reflect well on him. Exit interviews with players will definitely go a long way in informing Drury’s decision.

The alternate coaching candidates who are available aren’t exactly slam dunks. Joel Quenneville might not want the spotlight of New York after his last few years. Peter Laviolette hasn’t won a playoff series since 2018.

Are there any fair criticisms of Gallant’s coaching and in-game adjustments?
— Joseph Bedics

To me, the most noticeable disparity between Ruff and Gallant in this series was their ability to recognize issues and make adjustments. The corrections the Devils made in how they defended the Rangers’ power play proved to make a massive difference in the series after the Blueshirts dominated special teams through Games 1 and 2.

When the Devils carved up the neutral zone and pushed the Rangers to the outside, there wasn’t much of a response from the Blueshirts. Gallant probably underutilized Tarasenko, who logged some of the lowest ice times of his playoff career.

Keep hearing about the two goals in four games, but what about 16 goals in the other three? The imbalance of the team’s performance over the seven-game series was surreal.
— Christopher Walkley

That was probably the most interesting part of the series to me. The Rangers didn’t just win the games they won, they dominated them. Each win was by three or four goals, while the Devils scratched out an overtime win and a tight two-goal victory before their pair of 4-0 wins. For this star-studded lineup to get shut out twice is perhaps the most disheartening aspect of the first-round exit.

Tell me again why Kane was brought here? It seems the trade really disrupted this team. Clearly, he is not the player he was. The machinations that were done to get him on PP1 and on a top line disrupted the power play to the point where it was average.
— Richard Cantwell, Kelly Feniger, Zebop, Timer Pines

I think Gallant prioritized Kane too much, especially in comparison to how he utilized Tarasenko. It became pretty clear early on that Kane was not operating at 100 percent. Tarasenko absolutely was. He probably should’ve been on the top power-play unit more than Kane.

But if you’re Drury and the chance to acquire the Patrick Kane arises for the price of essentially nickels and dimes, any NHL general manager takes that deal every day of the week and twice on Sunday. Kane at 50 percent is still probably better than a good portion of the league, which was evident at the end of the regular season. He may not have had as big of an impact as the Rangers wanted him to, but he wasn’t a hindrance, either.

It wasn’t until the playoffs that Kane’s presence on the ice began to hurt the Rangers. He started to commit turnovers, and he couldn’t command the puck like he usually does. Maybe it wasn’t the right move for the Rangers, but it was a move they couldn’t pass up.

Is it fair to label this a “failed season” because of the first-round exit? After all, the Rangers did blow a 2-0 series lead. Or is it not a failure because you took a rival to seven games and ran into a hot goalie?
— Adam Dvorin

Absolutely it is fair to call this a “failed season.” Maybe if it was really neck-and-neck between the Rangers and Devils for the entire series, it would be easier to tip their cap to the Devils for simply being the better team. Not that they weren’t, but the Rangers only played two games at their absolute best and then veered off as the series unfolded.

It’s also worth considering whether there is any chance either Kane or Tarasenko — the team’s prized trade-deadline acquisitions — are retained as free agents (h/t Justin Bresner and Randy Ramirez).

The short answer is yes. I find it difficult to imagine either of the two big-name players taking a pay cut, but there might be a better chance of retaining Tarasenko than Kane, if Tarasenko is willing to take a discount to remain in New York.

It just may depend on what other steps the Rangers take in the offseason.

And if the rumors about Kane needing offseason surgery are true, he probably won’t be ready to play at the start of the season anyway, which would force the Rangers to find top-six right wingers immediately.

— Mollie Walker