...flubbing a weak clearing attempt into the opponents skate for a defensive zone turnover that ends up behind Hank. That's just shitty hockey and those plays are happening far too often with him for a while now.
RE: Corsi and advanced stats have nothing to do with irardi... Â
...flubbing a weak clearing attempt into the opponents skate for a defensive zone turnover that ends up behind Hank. That's just shitty hockey and those plays are happening far too often with him for a while now.
True. I wasnt trying to make an argument that he's Vlasic. Im just convinced that he isnt as bad as his top level CF% suggests.
The single most overly adored former Ranger of all time. Mainly because the way he is discussed, you'd think he was Chris CHelios. This past season was his best season by a massive amount. He was not even close to being that good for us. And he would not be a better top D man on this team than anyone other than Boyle (who outplayed him in the playoffs last year, even in our series against TB).
Deej, another extremely ignored yet important thing about Advanced Stats is that they take zero game context into account. They don't tell the story about who was winning the game and when, and by how much. They don't tell whether we played up or back. They can't tell the full story of why. For example: Dan Girardi and McD played 25 and 23 minutes last night, and we had a lead the whole game, the Hawks were playing catch up the whole night. In the third period they were in our zone dominating puck possession because the Rangers played passive, conservative hockey because they were going against a great team with Towes, Hossa, Kane etc... playing big minutes, and aggressively trying to tie the game. When those guys are on the ice, the top D guys are matched up nearly everytime with those players. If we are playing a "prevent" type of period to prevent a tying goal, and they have the puck for much of the period, it's not because the defensemen were ineffective. It's because the barrage of shots and puck possession by the Hawks would push the Rangers team and player "corsi's" down dramatically. If you look at the team Corsi numbers from last night, it was something like 65 - 45 in favor of the Hawks...yet we won the game. Thats what happens when you are playing conservatively with a lead against a great offensive opponent.
None of these stats are really taken in context. If you look at just the raw numbers, you're missing the details of the entire hockey game. If you use many of the advanced stats together, you can get a better idea but still not a great one. They are fun to look at and interesting to discuss etc... But if someone uses them exclusively to "see" what happened in the game, they are not seeing very much.
And Dan Girardi had a giveaway. Bad one. If we are lucky, neither he nor any of the other defensemen will make the same mistake again for the rest of the year. If some of you guys want to analyze and pick apart every giveaway, bad pass, mistake, poor positioning etc... enjoy that. What a miserable way to watch a hockey game.
The single most overly adored former Ranger of all time. Mainly because the way he is discussed, you'd think he was Chris CHelios. This past season was his best season by a massive amount. He was not even close to being that good for us. And he would not be a better top D man on this team than anyone other than Boyle (who outplayed him in the playoffs last year, even in our series against TB).
LOL. Let me guess, 'eye test'? A) Most analysts agreed he was our best defender throughout the 2014 playoffs and B) on what metric was Boyle better than him the past postseason?
But i will also say a big reason we can't get over Stralman is because he, Cally, Boyle and Yzerman shoved it up our ass in the ECF. Talk about an in-your-face mistake.
They were sick of the endless banner ceremony, too:
Quote:
“[W]e were sitting in here and they delayed a little bit, I may be a little bit upset so you want to go out there and pay them back,” Lundqvist said. “To try to kill the atmosphere a little bit like that was huge for us.”
look it up. Use anything you want....standard points etc or Corsi.
Greg you're just clueless as all hell when it comes to this shit. You just vomit out whatever nonsense you read somewhere and then fight that good fight because other people told you some wrong nonsense. If not agreeing with you makes me obtuse then that's super. You don't care to have a conversation, you just disagree with anything I say regardless. I could explain this shit with powerpoints and data and you'd ignore all of it because you have some sort of issue with me no matter the topic. It's boring to read your insults. Go rail against Girardi all day for all I care.
Im not sure how much I buy into the prevent defense theory Â
Inability to get the puck out of your zone for 60+ seconds is not buckling down and playing conservative. The Rangers routinely get the ice tilted against them late in game. Yes, it is because the other team is desperate. No, it is not because we've made an affirmative decision to cause heart attacks.
And Seth, gotta disagree on Stralman. He's a fine #2 dman and an excellent 2rd pair guy. The WOWY stats suggest that he made Staal WAY more effective.
RE: Im not sure how much I buy into the prevent defense theory Â
Inability to get the puck out of your zone for 60+ seconds is not buckling down and playing conservative. The Rangers routinely get the ice tilted against them late in game. Yes, it is because the other team is desperate. No, it is not because we've made an affirmative decision to cause heart attacks.
And Seth, gotta disagree on Stralman. He's a fine #2 dman and an excellent 2rd pair guy. The WOWY stats suggest that he made Staal WAY more effective.
I don't agree that we don't alter the game plan depending on score and opponent but ok. I could get detailed if you want but you don't so it's all good.
And thats cool about Stralman too. He was a fine defensive player for us but if you want, take a look at just his offensive numbers from his last year with us to last year with TB. I thought he was very good for us but he wasn't some elite defenseman that people remember him as. But agree to disagree.
Stralman got PP time in Tampa (and performed quite well) and never even got the opportunity in NY. Think that might explain why his numbers shot up in Tampa?
The single most overly adored former Ranger of all time. Mainly because the way he is discussed, you'd think he was Chris CHelios. This past season was his best season by a massive amount. He was not even close to being that good for us. And he would not be a better top D man on this team than anyone other than Boyle (who outplayed him in the playoffs last year, even in our series against TB).
Deej, another extremely ignored yet important thing about Advanced Stats is that they take zero game context into account. They don't tell the story about who was winning the game and when, and by how much. They don't tell whether we played up or back. They can't tell the full story of why. For example: Dan Girardi and McD played 25 and 23 minutes last night, and we had a lead the whole game, the Hawks were playing catch up the whole night. In the third period they were in our zone dominating puck possession because the Rangers played passive, conservative hockey because they were going against a great team with Towes, Hossa, Kane etc... playing big minutes, and aggressively trying to tie the game. When those guys are on the ice, the top D guys are matched up nearly everytime with those players. If we are playing a "prevent" type of period to prevent a tying goal, and they have the puck for much of the period, it's not because the defensemen were ineffective. It's because the barrage of shots and puck possession by the Hawks would push the Rangers team and player "corsi's" down dramatically. If you look at the team Corsi numbers from last night, it was something like 65 - 45 in favor of the Hawks...yet we won the game. Thats what happens when you are playing conservatively with a lead against a great offensive opponent.
None of these stats are really taken in context. If you look at just the raw numbers, you're missing the details of the entire hockey game. If you use many of the advanced stats together, you can get a better idea but still not a great one. They are fun to look at and interesting to discuss etc... But if someone uses them exclusively to "see" what happened in the game, they are not seeing very much.
And Dan Girardi had a giveaway. Bad one. If we are lucky, neither he nor any of the other defensemen will make the same mistake again for the rest of the year. If some of you guys want to analyze and pick apart every giveaway, bad pass, mistake, poor positioning etc... enjoy that. What a miserable way to watch a hockey game.
There's score adjusted Corsi, corsi close, corsi ahead/behind, etc., and multiple sites break it out. And according to Hockey Reference, Girardi's CF% 5 on 5 tied was worse than his overall CF% (with about a 3% increase in defensive zone starts in 5 on 5 tied, which was surprising to me). The stats very much take context into account.
my good man, we just will not agree on this one and I think that you (being someone who looks at these stats as seriously as you do) can look into the range of stats that includes mainly: Quality of Competition, Zone Start locations, total ice and even Quality of Teammates and you'll find what I am talking about regarding his vital role on the team. I get that you don't only think he sucks because of advanced stats, but because you say you watch the games and see a guy who is mediocre or worse. So it's really the two of us not seeing these things in the same view at all. From my point of view (talking about the stats specifically) when you put the relevant categories together, it shows exactly why he's not mediocre, not below average, not awful but actually the opposite.
To me Dan Girardi is just like a very solid, quality o lineman in the way that a lineman gets none of the attention until he commits a penalty or allows a sack. He may be consistent and play well nearly all of the time but when he fucks up, the mistakes are glaring and that's when fans take notice. He'll turn the puck over or he'll get beaten to the outside by some elite forward and it'll happen a bunch of times this season. And it'll happen because he plays every game against players that are on a higher level than nearly every defenseman on nearly every team and that includes himself. He even plays against those players more than most other more skilled defensemen from other teams do. People will flip out every time there's a mistake and we'll go in circles arguing about this shit for years to come. So as soon as we can find an elite player to play on the top pair for 25 minutes a game, we can all rejoice. Until then he'll probably stay up there because of his ability to never miss a game, his right handed shot, his conditioning, his more stay at home game that allows McD to play more two way, and his willingness to sacrifice the shit out of his body to block a shot and throw checks at anyone.
I'm happy he's there, many if not most are not. Not gonna agree and that's the way the cookie crumbles. Lets Go Rangers.
If there is expansion in 2017-18, do we expose him to the draft? I think the better reading of the CBA is that NMC/NTCs do not prohibit exposure to the expansion draft. Would he be picked, or would we need to sweeten the pot with a prospect/pick?
by an expansion team assuming he doesn't decline into a traffic cone. If a team is looking for some veteran leadership on the blueline he's a good option.
What exactly is the problem? What player is missing from the roster because of DGs salary? Yandle and Klein make a combined 5 mil. McD is a bargain and Boyle comes off the books after this season. So does Yandle. If his salary is higher than you like, what should his cap hit be in your opinion, in order to add much needed players to the team?
They center around increased defensive zone turnovers, inability to skate with the elite forwards he is matched up against and decline in winning puck battles. He isn't close to being the same polayer he was a few years ago.
I'd estimate a significant majority of Rangers fans see it this way. He is no lonegr suited to play top pairing minutes. The unwise contract he was given, including a head scratching NMC, locks him into a major role on this club.
Personally I'd shuffle the 'D' pairings if he continues to play poorly this season and find a way to move him down even if it results in a third pairing guy playing on his 'wrong' side.
We all like Girardi and know he is a warrior. It isn't about 'heart or grit'. It's about his lack of consistency, efficiency and effectiveness. At this point he is in over his head.
What exactly is the problem? What player is missing from the roster because of DGs salary? Yandle and Klein make a combined 5 mil. McD is a bargain and Boyle comes off the books after this season. So does Yandle. If his salary is higher than you like, what should his cap hit be in your opinion, in order to add much needed players to the team?
Duclair is missing. In order to acquire Yandle the Rangers had to give up Duclair and a #1 b/c they couldn't afford his cap number. It's not just Girardi, it's all the dollars tied up in this defense. Girardi is just the focus b/c of his cap number and age IMO. I'd be just as happy parting ways with Staal and hoping McIlrath adds a physical presence and dimension making a Giardi or Staal expendable.
What exactly is the problem? What player is missing from the roster because of DGs salary? Yandle and Klein make a combined 5 mil. McD is a bargain and Boyle comes off the books after this season. So does Yandle. If his salary is higher than you like, what should his cap hit be in your opinion, in order to add much needed players to the team?
Is this a joke? Like there is a special Dan Girardi budget and so if we werent paying him almost $6 million, we'd just eat the cap space? Sigh. This is all hypothetical, but:
1) Stralman, Boyle, Pouliot, Hags: Any of these guys might have been back if we had more cap room. Stralman in particular is interesting. I dont think the tradeoff was Strals v. Boyle. I think it was Strals v. Girardi.
2) Duclair/#1: If we didnt need AZ to eat half of Yandle's contract, I guarantee that we'd either still have Duclair or we'd have that #1 back.
3) Unknown UFA: if we had another ~6 million, we could have chased someone else.
4) Yandle (future): Very good chance he walks because we cant offer him the 6+ million that another team can offer.
5) Kreider (example): for the last several years we've been rolling over guys on short deals rather than locking them up long term for reasonable money. So next year we're going to pay more for a guy like Kreider than we probably should be paying.
Just listed a whole bunch of hypothetical nonsense. You wanted to add another player but who knows who that would have been. The fans were part of negotiations for yandle apparently so hypothetically we have up duclair because hypothetically the Coyotes wouldn't have wanted a top prospect for an all star offensive power play specialist who was their best player, we won't be able to retain our own guys in the future (hypothetically).
You guys win. Congrats. And sorry you have to lament what could have been and what could be. Can't keep arguing these same points. Can't keep arguing about who else everyone would rather have had on the team, even though the team was good enough to be the best over 82 games and missed a second final in a row by one game to Anton stralman. Just pointless to bash heads when we so completely disagree. Continue the daily routine and I'll try to contribute where I can around the Dan Girardi sucks comments.
The answer to the question of what we would do with DG's money if we hadnt spent it on DG requires a hypothetical answer. Not sure I understand your point, other than to be gratuitously obnoxious.
The answer to the question of what we would do with DG's money if we hadnt spent it on DG requires a hypothetical answer. Not sure I understand your point, other than to be gratuitously obnoxious.
People read way too much into some perceived tone in a post on a message board. Incredulous comes across as obnoxious. Disagreement comes across as argumentative. Sarcasm comes across as insult. Not my intent.
I just don't get all the woulda coulda shoulda when it comes to the current team. They've been a winning team with a solid roster that is mostly homegrown young talent mixed with veteran core players and some outside additions that have contributed to our best teams in a long time. Granted there's no trophy but I'm enjoying it while it lasts and I like everyone on this team. Seems like most people don't agree because they haven't been to the mountain top but we have one title in 75 years and two teams have won 5 of the last 6. So I'm at least happy that the team has as good a chance as any other, and I have a hard time being down on anyone on the roster at the moment. I like this particular team top to bottom pretty much. Obviously it ain't perfect but it's a likable group.
I think the shitty part was that we didn't trade Girardi for Vatanen+ Â
The answer to the question of what we would do with DG's money if we hadnt spent it on DG requires a hypothetical answer. Not sure I understand your point, other than to be gratuitously obnoxious.
People read way too much into some perceived tone in a post on a message board. Incredulous comes across as obnoxious. Disagreement comes across as argumentative. Sarcasm comes across as insult. Not my intent.
I just don't get all the woulda coulda shoulda when it comes to the current team. They've been a winning team with a solid roster that is mostly homegrown young talent mixed with veteran core players and some outside additions that have contributed to our best teams in a long time. Granted there's no trophy but I'm enjoying it while it lasts and I like everyone on this team. Seems like most people don't agree because they haven't been to the mountain top but we have one title in 75 years and two teams have won 5 of the last 6. So I'm at least happy that the team has as good a chance as any other, and I have a hard time being down on anyone on the roster at the moment. I like this particular team top to bottom pretty much. Obviously it ain't perfect but it's a likable group.
Seth, yes, we're good now, but the window is closing. I think that's the issue. It's not so much the prospect cupboard being bare anymore, but it's really the cap space that's become the main issue going forward. We need to re-sign Kreider, Hayes and Yande next year and it's not like we can unload the big cap hits like Girardi or Staal (at least not easily) given their NMCs.
as the Rangers have over the past 3 years, it's natural to wonder what has prevented the team from following through. It's also natural to wonder what needs to be done to give the team the best chance to win before the window closes. Obviously injuries and bad puck/ref luck can have a huge effect on the outcome of a season, but you really can't plan for that. No roster decision happens in a vacuum; every move is critical.
The fans were part of negotiations for yandle apparently so hypothetically we have up duclair because hypothetically the Coyotes wouldn't have wanted a top prospect for an all star offensive power play specialist who was their best player, (hypothetically).
It's pretty clear the Rangers gave up either the 1st round pick OR DuClair as compensation for the $2.6 million/year of cap space that Arizona is paying for 2 years (the first year of course pro-rated). Other terrific players such as Vermette (1st line C), Erik Cole, etc were traded for either a 1st rounder or a solid prospect, not both. In the offseason, Dougie Hamilton was traded for #15 and #45, and he's young, terrific, and cost-controlled for a lot of years.
None of us know if it would have been DuClair or the #1 (lets also not forget we sent Moore and a 2nd rounder in this package too) -- my guess is the late first rounder was the compensation for the cap help... but it was an overpay because of the salary relief.
I do agree 100% with your latest post -- this is fun, hard working group to root for. Personally I'd love to see Girardi hoist a trophy - he's as hard working and as good a teammate as they come. A guy you love to root for.
unfortunately talent wins a lot in this league - hence as you said the same teams winning the Cup repeatedly - not sure we have quite enough at the moment.
Hags at 4+ mil a year to be a redundant third liner who is fast and doesn't score for weeks at a time....
We are going to miss Hags. Sure we wish he scored more, but you just spent a post talking about what a likeable group this is - Hagelin was at the top of my list. Hated that trade, though yeah at $4 million its tough to retain him I guess.
This salary cap just sucks - and the owners have clearly circumvented it to pocket more for themselves. Ugh.
How many Hags plays ended up in the other team's zone? The guy drove good outcomes. A 3rd line guy who routinely gets the puck from his end to a faceoff in the other end is getting your scoring line great zone starts.
I don't think the window is closing as quickly as people seem to be panicking about. I also am rather happy that they won't be getting rid of the defensemen.
I think there's an amazing amount of intense analysis about the roster considering how close the team was and ideally will be this year. I truly can't understand why anyone thinks we don't have enough to win, and I don't know what people could possibly want to see as opposed to what we send out there every night. The best prospects we've had are now productive and young and getting better on the pro roster. There's still a handful of very high ceiling guys that aren't far off from joining the team but there isn't even any space at the moment because there's talent on every line.
The other thing I don't understand is this constant fear of losing our own free agents. Hasnt the team shown over and over again over many years now, that they know what they are doing when it comes to retaining their players (unless they ask for stupid contracts like Callahan)? We traded Hags and yes it was mostly about salary, but I also think it had to do with them realizing that although he was an extremely likable player and fun to watch play, he was basically a really fast penalty killer who was not skilled enough to score consistently, not big enough to be highly effective in the corners nor in front of the net, and not able to develop a real scoring touch which causes him to go long ass stretches where he can't score a goal. It's like Dave Maloney said about him, "if Hagelin had hands or any real scoring touch he could be Pavel Bure". Since he doesn't have those things, he can't play on the top 2 lines and be an impact player. He's a waste on a checking type of line too. So he's a tweener and I think salary mattered but they made a conscious choice which forward to move on from. Zucc, Stepan, Kreider, Brassard, Miller, Hayes...they are all better players.
People read way too much into some perceived tone in a post on a message board. Incredulous comes across as obnoxious. Disagreement comes across as argumentative. Sarcasm comes across as insult. Not my intent.
I've read hundreds of your posts. You get into a lot of pissing matches. Maybe you want to change things up. There is plenty of room to disagree without the hostility that you appear to heap on others, and that others appear to heap on you.
IMO the window is open so long as Hank is an elite goalie. Enough of the important roster players are locked up, assuming Kreider gets a deal, to really pin it all on Hank. Window could be open post-elite-Hank, but that's just guessing at this point.
I dont think the roster is overanalyzed merely because we've been close. The piss and vinegar #1 seed team from 4 years ago was rightfully reconstructed.
The gap between a championship and being Sharks East is so narrow that we focus on the seemingly small changes in the line-up so intensely. Girardi over Stralman, Tanner Glass, etc. only frustrate me so greatly because this team is a high quality, well-constructed roster.
I don't think the Blackhawks/Lightning were that much better than us last year, if they were at all (and I feel the same way about the Giants SB's - there were multiple teams 'good enough', so this isn't some whining about the better team lost - I've never believed the best team always wins championships). I think NYR was far more competitive than consensus says against the Kings. Nash hitting that open net and not being blocked, Kreider not hitting the post, a bad call, etc. could have changed that series.
A bit more luck could have changed things the past two years.
Lastly, from a process perspective (not that I'll ever have insight into this, of course), I get a bit frustrated with what I deem to be a significant shortening of the window (which many disagree with). Girardi for Stralman was a big example of this, as were the MSL/Yandle trades - but even more significantly was the two-year bridge deals that Kreider/Stepan got instead of the longer-term deal McDonagh got. A more concerted effort should have been made to get those guys on cheap deals, IMO.
IMO the window is open so long as Hank is an elite goalie. Enough of the important roster players are locked up, assuming Kreider gets a deal, to really pin it all on Hank. Window could be open post-elite-Hank, but that's just guessing at this point.
I dont think the roster is overanalyzed merely because we've been close. The piss and vinegar #1 seed team from 4 years ago was rightfully reconstructed.
Hats off to Sather for that one. Took a lot of balls and he executed it well. I never believed in that 2012 team.
People read way too much into some perceived tone in a post on a message board. Incredulous comes across as obnoxious. Disagreement comes across as argumentative. Sarcasm comes across as insult. Not my intent.
I've read hundreds of your posts. You get into a lot of pissing matches. Maybe you want to change things up. There is plenty of room to disagree without the hostility that you appear to heap on others, and that others appear to heap on you.
I didn't say I never post pissed off , or sarcastically, or to tell someone I think their post is moronic or worse. I meant I didn't mean to that time and it happens often that people get really defensive when I didn't mean to be as antagonistic as they thought. And yeah I find that on this board if you don't apologize for even having a different opinion before you disagree, people have a real problem with opinions that are opposite but as sure as theirs are. You say I'm hostile and I say others are. If ten people agree on something and I tell them why they are wrong, on this site people can't deal with that really often
And I agree regarding the Final two seasons ago - I know it sounds goofy to say, but that was the closest 4-1 series I've ever seen. The Kings were the better team but they also got a bunch of breaks, which made it a quick series. If the Rangers got a handful of those breaks instead, the series easily could have gone seven games.
The Kings dominance in the third created the perception that they were completely superior.
What frustrated the fuck out of me was that the team looked really good in OT in each game after getting bull dozed in the third. Didn't make sense to me.
True. I wasnt trying to make an argument that he's Vlasic. Im just convinced that he isnt as bad as his top level CF% suggests.
Deej, another extremely ignored yet important thing about Advanced Stats is that they take zero game context into account. They don't tell the story about who was winning the game and when, and by how much. They don't tell whether we played up or back. They can't tell the full story of why. For example: Dan Girardi and McD played 25 and 23 minutes last night, and we had a lead the whole game, the Hawks were playing catch up the whole night. In the third period they were in our zone dominating puck possession because the Rangers played passive, conservative hockey because they were going against a great team with Towes, Hossa, Kane etc... playing big minutes, and aggressively trying to tie the game. When those guys are on the ice, the top D guys are matched up nearly everytime with those players. If we are playing a "prevent" type of period to prevent a tying goal, and they have the puck for much of the period, it's not because the defensemen were ineffective. It's because the barrage of shots and puck possession by the Hawks would push the Rangers team and player "corsi's" down dramatically. If you look at the team Corsi numbers from last night, it was something like 65 - 45 in favor of the Hawks...yet we won the game. Thats what happens when you are playing conservatively with a lead against a great offensive opponent.
None of these stats are really taken in context. If you look at just the raw numbers, you're missing the details of the entire hockey game. If you use many of the advanced stats together, you can get a better idea but still not a great one. They are fun to look at and interesting to discuss etc... But if someone uses them exclusively to "see" what happened in the game, they are not seeing very much.
And Dan Girardi had a giveaway. Bad one. If we are lucky, neither he nor any of the other defensemen will make the same mistake again for the rest of the year. If some of you guys want to analyze and pick apart every giveaway, bad pass, mistake, poor positioning etc... enjoy that. What a miserable way to watch a hockey game.
LOL. Let me guess, 'eye test'? A) Most analysts agreed he was our best defender throughout the 2014 playoffs and B) on what metric was Boyle better than him the past postseason?
But i will also say a big reason we can't get over Stralman is because he, Cally, Boyle and Yzerman shoved it up our ass in the ECF. Talk about an in-your-face mistake.
Link - ( New Window )
Greg you're just clueless as all hell when it comes to this shit. You just vomit out whatever nonsense you read somewhere and then fight that good fight because other people told you some wrong nonsense. If not agreeing with you makes me obtuse then that's super. You don't care to have a conversation, you just disagree with anything I say regardless. I could explain this shit with powerpoints and data and you'd ignore all of it because you have some sort of issue with me no matter the topic. It's boring to read your insults. Go rail against Girardi all day for all I care.
And Seth, gotta disagree on Stralman. He's a fine #2 dman and an excellent 2rd pair guy. The WOWY stats suggest that he made Staal WAY more effective.
And Seth, gotta disagree on Stralman. He's a fine #2 dman and an excellent 2rd pair guy. The WOWY stats suggest that he made Staal WAY more effective.
I don't agree that we don't alter the game plan depending on score and opponent but ok. I could get detailed if you want but you don't so it's all good.
And thats cool about Stralman too. He was a fine defensive player for us but if you want, take a look at just his offensive numbers from his last year with us to last year with TB. I thought he was very good for us but he wasn't some elite defenseman that people remember him as. But agree to disagree.
Suck it Fish!
Suck it Fish!
Good one bro
Really sucks about stralman. Can't believe he's gone.
Deej, another extremely ignored yet important thing about Advanced Stats is that they take zero game context into account. They don't tell the story about who was winning the game and when, and by how much. They don't tell whether we played up or back. They can't tell the full story of why. For example: Dan Girardi and McD played 25 and 23 minutes last night, and we had a lead the whole game, the Hawks were playing catch up the whole night. In the third period they were in our zone dominating puck possession because the Rangers played passive, conservative hockey because they were going against a great team with Towes, Hossa, Kane etc... playing big minutes, and aggressively trying to tie the game. When those guys are on the ice, the top D guys are matched up nearly everytime with those players. If we are playing a "prevent" type of period to prevent a tying goal, and they have the puck for much of the period, it's not because the defensemen were ineffective. It's because the barrage of shots and puck possession by the Hawks would push the Rangers team and player "corsi's" down dramatically. If you look at the team Corsi numbers from last night, it was something like 65 - 45 in favor of the Hawks...yet we won the game. Thats what happens when you are playing conservatively with a lead against a great offensive opponent.
None of these stats are really taken in context. If you look at just the raw numbers, you're missing the details of the entire hockey game. If you use many of the advanced stats together, you can get a better idea but still not a great one. They are fun to look at and interesting to discuss etc... But if someone uses them exclusively to "see" what happened in the game, they are not seeing very much.
And Dan Girardi had a giveaway. Bad one. If we are lucky, neither he nor any of the other defensemen will make the same mistake again for the rest of the year. If some of you guys want to analyze and pick apart every giveaway, bad pass, mistake, poor positioning etc... enjoy that. What a miserable way to watch a hockey game.
There's score adjusted Corsi, corsi close, corsi ahead/behind, etc., and multiple sites break it out. And according to Hockey Reference, Girardi's CF% 5 on 5 tied was worse than his overall CF% (with about a 3% increase in defensive zone starts in 5 on 5 tied, which was surprising to me). The stats very much take context into account.
To me Dan Girardi is just like a very solid, quality o lineman in the way that a lineman gets none of the attention until he commits a penalty or allows a sack. He may be consistent and play well nearly all of the time but when he fucks up, the mistakes are glaring and that's when fans take notice. He'll turn the puck over or he'll get beaten to the outside by some elite forward and it'll happen a bunch of times this season. And it'll happen because he plays every game against players that are on a higher level than nearly every defenseman on nearly every team and that includes himself. He even plays against those players more than most other more skilled defensemen from other teams do. People will flip out every time there's a mistake and we'll go in circles arguing about this shit for years to come. So as soon as we can find an elite player to play on the top pair for 25 minutes a game, we can all rejoice. Until then he'll probably stay up there because of his ability to never miss a game, his right handed shot, his conditioning, his more stay at home game that allows McD to play more two way, and his willingness to sacrifice the shit out of his body to block a shot and throw checks at anyone.
I'm happy he's there, many if not most are not. Not gonna agree and that's the way the cookie crumbles. Lets Go Rangers.
What exactly is the problem? What player is missing from the roster because of DGs salary? Yandle and Klein make a combined 5 mil. McD is a bargain and Boyle comes off the books after this season. So does Yandle. If his salary is higher than you like, what should his cap hit be in your opinion, in order to add much needed players to the team?
I'd estimate a significant majority of Rangers fans see it this way. He is no lonegr suited to play top pairing minutes. The unwise contract he was given, including a head scratching NMC, locks him into a major role on this club.
Personally I'd shuffle the 'D' pairings if he continues to play poorly this season and find a way to move him down even if it results in a third pairing guy playing on his 'wrong' side.
We all like Girardi and know he is a warrior. It isn't about 'heart or grit'. It's about his lack of consistency, efficiency and effectiveness. At this point he is in over his head.
Quote:
is the problem
What exactly is the problem? What player is missing from the roster because of DGs salary? Yandle and Klein make a combined 5 mil. McD is a bargain and Boyle comes off the books after this season. So does Yandle. If his salary is higher than you like, what should his cap hit be in your opinion, in order to add much needed players to the team?
Duclair is missing. In order to acquire Yandle the Rangers had to give up Duclair and a #1 b/c they couldn't afford his cap number. It's not just Girardi, it's all the dollars tied up in this defense. Girardi is just the focus b/c of his cap number and age IMO. I'd be just as happy parting ways with Staal and hoping McIlrath adds a physical presence and dimension making a Giardi or Staal expendable.
Quote:
is the problem
What exactly is the problem? What player is missing from the roster because of DGs salary? Yandle and Klein make a combined 5 mil. McD is a bargain and Boyle comes off the books after this season. So does Yandle. If his salary is higher than you like, what should his cap hit be in your opinion, in order to add much needed players to the team?
Is this a joke? Like there is a special Dan Girardi budget and so if we werent paying him almost $6 million, we'd just eat the cap space? Sigh. This is all hypothetical, but:
1) Stralman, Boyle, Pouliot, Hags: Any of these guys might have been back if we had more cap room. Stralman in particular is interesting. I dont think the tradeoff was Strals v. Boyle. I think it was Strals v. Girardi.
2) Duclair/#1: If we didnt need AZ to eat half of Yandle's contract, I guarantee that we'd either still have Duclair or we'd have that #1 back.
3) Unknown UFA: if we had another ~6 million, we could have chased someone else.
4) Yandle (future): Very good chance he walks because we cant offer him the 6+ million that another team can offer.
5) Kreider (example): for the last several years we've been rolling over guys on short deals rather than locking them up long term for reasonable money. So next year we're going to pay more for a guy like Kreider than we probably should be paying.
You guys win. Congrats. And sorry you have to lament what could have been and what could be. Can't keep arguing these same points. Can't keep arguing about who else everyone would rather have had on the team, even though the team was good enough to be the best over 82 games and missed a second final in a row by one game to Anton stralman. Just pointless to bash heads when we so completely disagree. Continue the daily routine and I'll try to contribute where I can around the Dan Girardi sucks comments.
Let's go Rangers
And hold on...Pouliot?!? That dude is fucking awful.
Hags at 4+ mil a year to be a redundant third liner who is fast and doesn't score for weeks at a time....
We just ain't on the same page.
You win again.
People read way too much into some perceived tone in a post on a message board. Incredulous comes across as obnoxious. Disagreement comes across as argumentative. Sarcasm comes across as insult. Not my intent.
I just don't get all the woulda coulda shoulda when it comes to the current team. They've been a winning team with a solid roster that is mostly homegrown young talent mixed with veteran core players and some outside additions that have contributed to our best teams in a long time. Granted there's no trophy but I'm enjoying it while it lasts and I like everyone on this team. Seems like most people don't agree because they haven't been to the mountain top but we have one title in 75 years and two teams have won 5 of the last 6. So I'm at least happy that the team has as good a chance as any other, and I have a hard time being down on anyone on the roster at the moment. I like this particular team top to bottom pretty much. Obviously it ain't perfect but it's a likable group.
Quote:
The answer to the question of what we would do with DG's money if we hadnt spent it on DG requires a hypothetical answer. Not sure I understand your point, other than to be gratuitously obnoxious.
People read way too much into some perceived tone in a post on a message board. Incredulous comes across as obnoxious. Disagreement comes across as argumentative. Sarcasm comes across as insult. Not my intent.
I just don't get all the woulda coulda shoulda when it comes to the current team. They've been a winning team with a solid roster that is mostly homegrown young talent mixed with veteran core players and some outside additions that have contributed to our best teams in a long time. Granted there's no trophy but I'm enjoying it while it lasts and I like everyone on this team. Seems like most people don't agree because they haven't been to the mountain top but we have one title in 75 years and two teams have won 5 of the last 6. So I'm at least happy that the team has as good a chance as any other, and I have a hard time being down on anyone on the roster at the moment. I like this particular team top to bottom pretty much. Obviously it ain't perfect but it's a likable group.
Seth, yes, we're good now, but the window is closing. I think that's the issue. It's not so much the prospect cupboard being bare anymore, but it's really the cap space that's become the main issue going forward. We need to re-sign Kreider, Hayes and Yande next year and it's not like we can unload the big cap hits like Girardi or Staal (at least not easily) given their NMCs.
It's pretty clear the Rangers gave up either the 1st round pick OR DuClair as compensation for the $2.6 million/year of cap space that Arizona is paying for 2 years (the first year of course pro-rated). Other terrific players such as Vermette (1st line C), Erik Cole, etc were traded for either a 1st rounder or a solid prospect, not both. In the offseason, Dougie Hamilton was traded for #15 and #45, and he's young, terrific, and cost-controlled for a lot of years.
None of us know if it would have been DuClair or the #1 (lets also not forget we sent Moore and a 2nd rounder in this package too) -- my guess is the late first rounder was the compensation for the cap help... but it was an overpay because of the salary relief.
I do agree 100% with your latest post -- this is fun, hard working group to root for. Personally I'd love to see Girardi hoist a trophy - he's as hard working and as good a teammate as they come. A guy you love to root for.
unfortunately talent wins a lot in this league - hence as you said the same teams winning the Cup repeatedly - not sure we have quite enough at the moment.
Hags at 4+ mil a year to be a redundant third liner who is fast and doesn't score for weeks at a time....
We are going to miss Hags. Sure we wish he scored more, but you just spent a post talking about what a likeable group this is - Hagelin was at the top of my list. Hated that trade, though yeah at $4 million its tough to retain him I guess.
This salary cap just sucks - and the owners have clearly circumvented it to pocket more for themselves. Ugh.
I think there's an amazing amount of intense analysis about the roster considering how close the team was and ideally will be this year. I truly can't understand why anyone thinks we don't have enough to win, and I don't know what people could possibly want to see as opposed to what we send out there every night. The best prospects we've had are now productive and young and getting better on the pro roster. There's still a handful of very high ceiling guys that aren't far off from joining the team but there isn't even any space at the moment because there's talent on every line.
The other thing I don't understand is this constant fear of losing our own free agents. Hasnt the team shown over and over again over many years now, that they know what they are doing when it comes to retaining their players (unless they ask for stupid contracts like Callahan)? We traded Hags and yes it was mostly about salary, but I also think it had to do with them realizing that although he was an extremely likable player and fun to watch play, he was basically a really fast penalty killer who was not skilled enough to score consistently, not big enough to be highly effective in the corners nor in front of the net, and not able to develop a real scoring touch which causes him to go long ass stretches where he can't score a goal. It's like Dave Maloney said about him, "if Hagelin had hands or any real scoring touch he could be Pavel Bure". Since he doesn't have those things, he can't play on the top 2 lines and be an impact player. He's a waste on a checking type of line too. So he's a tweener and I think salary mattered but they made a conscious choice which forward to move on from. Zucc, Stepan, Kreider, Brassard, Miller, Hayes...they are all better players.
People read way too much into some perceived tone in a post on a message board. Incredulous comes across as obnoxious. Disagreement comes across as argumentative. Sarcasm comes across as insult. Not my intent.
I've read hundreds of your posts. You get into a lot of pissing matches. Maybe you want to change things up. There is plenty of room to disagree without the hostility that you appear to heap on others, and that others appear to heap on you.
I dont think the roster is overanalyzed merely because we've been close. The piss and vinegar #1 seed team from 4 years ago was rightfully reconstructed.
Another misperceived tone? I do believe if McIlrath plays solid defense and adds a physical presence makes a Staal or Girardi expendable.
Wonky would be keeping all the defensemen including a developed McIlrath and remaining under the cap.
I don't think the Blackhawks/Lightning were that much better than us last year, if they were at all (and I feel the same way about the Giants SB's - there were multiple teams 'good enough', so this isn't some whining about the better team lost - I've never believed the best team always wins championships). I think NYR was far more competitive than consensus says against the Kings. Nash hitting that open net and not being blocked, Kreider not hitting the post, a bad call, etc. could have changed that series.
A bit more luck could have changed things the past two years.
Lastly, from a process perspective (not that I'll ever have insight into this, of course), I get a bit frustrated with what I deem to be a significant shortening of the window (which many disagree with). Girardi for Stralman was a big example of this, as were the MSL/Yandle trades - but even more significantly was the two-year bridge deals that Kreider/Stepan got instead of the longer-term deal McDonagh got. A more concerted effort should have been made to get those guys on cheap deals, IMO.
I dont think the roster is overanalyzed merely because we've been close. The piss and vinegar #1 seed team from 4 years ago was rightfully reconstructed.
Hats off to Sather for that one. Took a lot of balls and he executed it well. I never believed in that 2012 team.
Quote:
People read way too much into some perceived tone in a post on a message board. Incredulous comes across as obnoxious. Disagreement comes across as argumentative. Sarcasm comes across as insult. Not my intent.
I've read hundreds of your posts. You get into a lot of pissing matches. Maybe you want to change things up. There is plenty of room to disagree without the hostility that you appear to heap on others, and that others appear to heap on you.
I didn't say I never post pissed off , or sarcastically, or to tell someone I think their post is moronic or worse. I meant I didn't mean to that time and it happens often that people get really defensive when I didn't mean to be as antagonistic as they thought. And yeah I find that on this board if you don't apologize for even having a different opinion before you disagree, people have a real problem with opinions that are opposite but as sure as theirs are. You say I'm hostile and I say others are. If ten people agree on something and I tell them why they are wrong, on this site people can't deal with that really often
What frustrated the fuck out of me was that the team looked really good in OT in each game after getting bull dozed in the third. Didn't make sense to me.