Yeah I mean we have to do due diligence and debate correlation vs causation, but since 2008 (that's as far back as we can go) only one team with analytics as bad as the Rangers has won. Only one other team with a sub-50 xGF% has won. That's two teams with bad analytics in the last 16 years. The overwhelming majority of teams with bad analytics don't even make the playoffs.
But hey, you never know. Panarin wasn't supposed to be this good and have a career year at 32 years old either. I just don't blame analysts for taking a look and saying "Hey, wait a minute, the Rangers haven't checked out very well at 5v5, and they got a lot of points from gimmicky 3v3 OT wins (8) that don't come into play in the playoffs". It's probably the most objective, valid analysis that can be drawn from the data. It won't surprise me if they get bounced in the first or second round, and 90% of the fan base is left thinking they choked. I wouldn't see it that way because I don't see them as favorites at all.
I hope they can buck the trend. I just think they'll just need a bunch of extra bounces go their way than a normal path to the Cup.