BrooksBurner

Is it rope a dope if the high danger is as big a gap as CSA says it is? I don’t trust CSA, very strange. NST has 5v5/ES close, a little in favor for Canes, EvolvingHockey has it a little in favor of the Rangers. This has been a close matchup by all accounts….except CSA.

We all love Valley, but I’m sorry I find this incredibly unlikely to be accurate based on what I’ve seen to this point. CSA ES 11.21 to 5.27 xGF in favor of Canes 23 to 12 HDCF, Canes NST ES 8.45 to 6.97 xGF, Canes 33-30 HDCF, Canes Valley went on and blasted ESPN and all of the non-ESPN statistical analysts who contributed to the article with their data models, and they all said the same thing that the Rangers were average to below average at 5v5 expected goals while Valley said the Rangers were 9th at CSA. Now NST is saying it’s pretty damn close, which is what I’ve seen watching these games, and CSA is saying the Rangers are getting walked on the ice and this is basically just Shesterkin stealing games. Again, love Valley but I have serious doubts about the accuracy of CSA at this juncture.

I don’t see how it’s even a question after seeing Chytil progress through the game.

Here's my two cents. PP2 hasn't done much damage all year no matter who is out there. The chances of them scoring are low, and they are playing the top rated PK unit from the season that can turn the tables and put a shortie up on the board. Yeah yeah, I know their PK unit hasn't fit this billing this series, but they got close a couple of times to scoring a shortie in previous games and Laviolette isn't going to disrespect them because his PP1 unit happened to have success against their PK for 2 games (sidebar: Rangers 0/4 on PP last night). The approach appears to be to aggressively try to score with PP1, and then cautiously try to score with two defensemen on PP2. I think that's the right play against the Canes in close games or playing with the lead. There's no reason to risk letting a well below average PP2 unit give up a back breaking shortie. Perhaps if there was a combination that was more successful throughout the season, it'd be a little different. I did take issue with the 3rd period PP strategy last night though. I don't think PP1 was near aggressive enough, and I think PP2 got out there too early to play the cautious approach. I'd rather use my best players to go for the throat, especially if they're producing, but that's just me. I also have 0 games coached and Laviolette has over 2000, so there's that.

It's a hog wash narrative. Those people aren't adjusting to what the stats are telling them. Everyone here knows I pay attention to 5v5 xG as a strong indicator of success, but I never use it in a vacuum because how the total is being arrived at matters. High danger chances is a massive part of it and that has been at worst a draw and at best a slight edge to the Rangers all series at 5v5. The expectation before the series was that the Canes were going to generate significantly more high danger chances than the Rangers at 5v5, and based on the season's stats it was a reasonable and >50% expectation of happening. It simply hasn't played out like that at all. Shoulda, coulda, woulda, but not-a happenin. Sucks for them.

Yup. There's give and take. I'm referring moreso to his play when the puck is unstable in the defensive zone. Panicking and reactively getting rid of the puck without a plan only contributes to the instability, leads to turnovers and chaos, and essentially feeds the backbone of the Hurricanes' entire offensive game plan. He doesn't have a problem remaining calm and turning it into a board battle. It slows the game down against a fast team, allows the rest of his teammates to gather and re-position themselves, and provides a situation the Rangers can still win clean control for a break the other way. I've noticed him do this several times.

Speaking of Hartford, the Wolf Pack are in the 2nd round up 2-1 against the Bruins, a win away from moving on. Othmann a goal and 4 points in 6 playoff games, Berard a goal and 5 points

We have all been talking about Chytil's career potentially being over at various points this season. To see him on the ice is an awesome rallying point. I was kind of surprised to see the focus being on Rempe losing his 6 minutes a game, overshadowing Chytil's unlikely comeback this year.

He has another year left on his current bridge contract and his birthday is in October. Next year is his age 23 season. His next contract won’t start until his age 24 season. An 8 year deal when it expires puts him at 31 years old as a UFA going on his age 32 season.

A lot of players like to cash in on a big 8 year “take me to retirement” deal around 29-30. An 8 year extension would take him to 31, at which time he might be looking at 4-6 year offers instead. I’d bet they’ll settle on 5-6 years at $6-7M, which takes him to 28-29, but the Rangers should still try for that 8 year extension and hope sweetening the AAV by 1-2m is good enough.

We heard incessantly about how we got 1OA a year too late (Lafreniere instead of Hughes), and I won’t pretend I hadn’t thought that before myself, so I’m just gonna go ahead and say it. Jack Hughes might always be the more naturally gifted player with that coveted speed, but Lafreniere might always be the better, winning hockey player.

Yup, exactly, and in general he just has a knack for carrying the puck deep and helping establish zone time. Kakko's strength is playing with zone time. He's pretty shit on the rush.

Can't believe you led the donut brigade against him