Targets to Break the Rangers' Homogeneity?

an immensely strong forecheck worked wonders for the islanders last nite. we are not built to play that game. believe thats where we need to be to compete at the next level. granted we've assembled a great deal of talent but not in that area. its going to take some heavy lifting for us to get there assuming if thats what the next management believes is missing.

Q? What does our ideal makeup look like now? Agree we have acquired sharpshooters and a load of talented players. Do we need more worker bees? That strong forecheck you mentioned requires a certain type of player.

an immensely strong forecheck worked wonders for the islanders last nite. we are not built to play that game. believe thats where we need to be to compete at the next level. granted we've assembled a great deal of talent but not in that area. its going to take some heavy lifting for us to get there assuming if thats what the next management believes is missing.

It definitely is. I’m not saying this as a Rangers fan, but I’d rather be on this side of the ball than the other. Energy guys are a lot easier to find than guys with top level skill. The Rangers have that. They need to figure out who out of that group makes the cut moving forward and who will be used as trade bait to get what we need. Like others have said, not every trade will look like a “win” as far as what we get vs. what we give up. But we have our area of strength, and need to use our over abundance of that to strengthen our weaknesses.

I think you've got two key factors here:

1 - A relentless forecheck can take you very far, but comes at a rather significant cost - that is an EXHAUSTING game to play. Relentless forecheck teams that lack top end skill eventually see the legs give way and lose - heck, we were that team under Torts, we should know this. You need a balance - that's why Vegas, Colorado, and Tampa work so well, and bluntly, it's why Montreal has shocked some people.

2 - Too much skill is a much easier problem to "deal with" than too much grit.

I think this is an addressable problem, but I'd prefer to see it addressed up and down the lineup rather than in the bottom 6. Let's get Jones a big partner. Let's get Panarin-Strome a brick shithouse on RW. Let's get Filip Chytil someone who creates space for him.

Has anyone brought up Erik Haula???

2 years ago.

I don’t think he necessarily fills the current void on the team.

Blake Coleman is a guy I want them to go after badly.

They don’t need another winger.

I doubt it would happen for a variety of reasons. Namely, because I don’t think his team is necessarily looking to move him. And if they were, I doubt we would be their first phone call. But man, I would absolutely love to get Miles Wood on this team. He was talked about in another thread. That guy would be a tremendous fit on this team.

Again, that’s probably not a reality. I’m aware. I was just watching something about him though and man, would he be a nice get.

There are options out there to fill our needs. Very curious to see how Drury goes about it.

Trade for Alex Tuch. 25, signed for six more years at $4.75 million. Vegas has like $2.4 million in cap room and need to re-sign Alec Martinez. Also need centers. Send 'em Chytil.

ANOTHER right wing? Center. They need a center and bottom 6 wingers. Tuch is a tweener (mid 6) but is making close to 5. I thought we were against paying 3rd and 4th liners that kind of money?

Oh sorry, he's listed as a center everywhere. Thought he played center previously. Looking at his faceoff numbers early on they ate kinda meh, so I guess he was moved to wing a few years ago.

I believe for the Devils he did play more center. When he was traded to Tampa Bay, he played almost exclusively wing (14 faceoffs in 64 games). Prior to that, he took a bunch of faceoffs in NJ but like you said, definitely wasn't good at them. Nor is he a true "two-way player" we want to aim for the third line. All his advanced metrics are incredibly poor in terms of puck possession and retention, until his full season with TB where they became slightly acceptable.

I believe for the Devils he did play more center. When he was traded to Tampa Bay, he played almost exclusively wing (14 faceoffs in 64 games). Prior to that, he took a bunch of faceoffs in NJ but like you said, definitely wasn't good at them. Nor is he a true "two-way player" we want to aim for the third line. All his advanced metrics are incredibly poor in terms of puck possession and retention, until his full season with TB where they became slightly acceptable.

You don't acquire Blake Coleman because he's an analytics darling. He's a shit-disturber. A disruptor. A presence. Casey Cizikas, Matt Martin, Cal Clutterbuck, Blake Coleman, Barclay Goodrow, Ryan Reaves, Keegan Kolesar, etc. all have negative possession metrics. Yet every one of them make a positive impression on their team. Because they're role players, and they play their roles well.

We have really got to stop with this idea that every hockey player on a successful team must be adept offensive contributors. There are other facets to the game that play out every playoffs that send those teams packing. Every. Single. Year.

Stop trying to build a Presidents Trophy team and start trying to build a Stanley Cup Champion. The latter requires qualities that go beyond simple shot share.

You don't acquire Blake Coleman because he's an analytics darling. He's a shit-disturber. A disruptor. A presence. Casey Cizikas, Matt Martin, Cal Clutterbuck, Blake Coleman, Barclay Goodrow, Ryan Reaves, Keegan Kolesar, etc. all have negative possession metrics. Yet every one of them make a positive impression on their team. Because they're role players, and they play their roles well.

 

We have really got to stop with this idea that every hockey player on a successful team must be adept offensive contributors. There are other facets to the game that play out every playoffs that send those teams packing. Every. Single. Year.

 

Stop trying to build a Presidents Trophy team and start trying to build a Stanley Cup Champion. The latter requires qualities that go beyond simple shot share.

Preach!

I see this everywhere on Rangers social media. "Can't bring that guy in because he's 30." "Can't bring that guy in because he doesn't score." "Can't bring that guy in because of his advanced stats."

No. No. You bring guys in who know how to play the game and know what their role is. This is why Gallant is a good hire. He knows how and where to utilize his players. He knows that Vitali Kravstov on the 4th line is not the way toward success. 4 goal scoring lines is not how you win playoff games. Look at the teams left. They're huge. They have skill up top and hard core grinders in the bottom of the lineup. They wear down the opposing D. And guess what, this is how it is every single year. Tampa last year. The Blues before that. The Caps before that. etc.

Yes, the game has changed. Yes, the average age is younger. But the only teams that survive are the teams that have men on them. Oilers, Toronto, Canes, Rangers. Skill doesn't matter if your team isn't balanced.

Islanders are not an impressive team on paper. They have about 4-5 guys who have what I would consider bad contracts. But those guys are hockey players built for deep playoff runs. Players that do the little things that get overshadowed in 82 games but get magnified in 7.

Yeah, the regular season game has changed. The playoffs haven't. I don't give a flying fuck about my third and fourth line players having negative shot shares when the team is fucking winning.

I bet if you go back and look at the Rangers' roster from the early 2010s that made multiple runs at the East/Cup Final, their role players weren't positive possession players. And before you go "that's why they lost," I bet the Kings' bottom-sixers weren't either.

Yeah, the regular season game has changed. The playoffs haven't. I don't give a flying fuck about my third and fourth line players having negative shot shares when the team is fucking winning.

 

I bet if you go back and look at the Rangers' roster from the early 2010s that made multiple runs at the East/Cup Final, their role players weren't positive possession players. And before you go "that's why they lost," I bet the Kings' bottom-sixers weren't either.

I mean Rangers went the deepest when they had a heavy bottom 6.

The other thing that's apparent as well... how many small D are left? Any? I know Lindgren plays a big game but I'll a little weary of Lundkvist, Jones, Fox and Lindren on the same squad.

I mean Rangers went the deepest when they had a heavy bottom 6.

 

The other thing that's apparent as well... how many small D are left? Any? I know Lindgren plays a big game but I'll a little weary of Lundkvist, Jones, Fox and Lindren on the same squad.

I put together the list a bit ago:

You can't play three 175 lb defenders with any forward group and hope to win anything. The biggest problem with all this stuff is year-after-year we go through these exercises and fans clamor and clamor to build, in effect, the best regular season roster, and year-after-year, the best regular season rosters get bounced in the playoffs, and the best teams — the clubs with the best balance of skill and strength are who go deepest. Look at the final four this year. Really look at them. Look at their blue lines, especially:

 

The Knights don't have a single defender under 6'1 and their lightest defender is Theordore (195). Their top-four can't be moved. Martinez is 6'1, 209. Pietrangelo is 6'3, 210. McNabb is 6'4, 216. Theodore is 6'2, 195.

 

The Islanders don't one regular defenseman under 6'0 (Andy Greene) and he plays on their third pairing. Their top-four can't be moved. Pelech is 6'3, 205. Pulock is 6'2, 215. Leddy is 6'0, 207. Mayfield is 6'5, 220.

 

The Habs don't have a single defender under 6'0. Their top-four: Chiarot (6'3, 234), Weber (6'4, 229), Kulak (6'1, 192), Edmundson (6'4, 227).

 

The Lightning have no one under 6'1. Their top-four: Hedman (6'6, 241), Rutta (6'3, 204), McDonagh (6'1, 215), Cernak (6'3, 220). Their third pairing is Sergachev (6'3, 216) and Savard (6'2, 233).

 

Notice the trend yet?

I put together the list a bit ago:

Well, there you go. Now I don't have to look it up. This is part of the reason I don't see Jones sticking around, and if the Rangers move a legit d prospect it'll be one of their smaller ones and not Schneider.

Same. At least, that's my hope. I'd rather move one of Lunkvist or Jones than Robertson or Schneider for exactly that reason. Knowing damn well I'm probably giving up more points in the deal. I don't care.

"I'm not looking for the best players, Craig, I'm lookin' for the right ones."

Same. At least, that's my hope. I'd rather move one of Lunkvist or Jones than Robertson or Schneider for exactly that reason. Knowing damn well I'm probably giving up more points in the deal. I don't care.

 

"I'm not looking for the best players, Craig, I'm lookin' for the right ones."

IF you move Lundqvist you dont do it this off season IMO. Kids gonna be good we all know it. Let that trade value increase before you move him.

Ideally though you keep him and Fox and upgrade the rest of the D to taller meaner dudes.

Nah, if the goal is the playoffs, and to make noise in them, you make the move that betters your roster for them. If that's this week, next month, or at the deadline, I don't care. I just don't want to see a bunch of under 180-pounders on the blue line in the post season.

At least you know you won't have to see them for long.

I mean Rangers went the deepest when they had a heavy bottom 6.

 

The other thing that's apparent as well... how many small D are left? Any? I know Lindgren plays a big game but I'll a little weary of Lundkvist, Jones, Fox and Lindren on the same squad.

This has been discussed elsewhere.

A) Our smaller D-men are [potentially] elite players.

2) Washington won the cup with Kempny (6' 194) playing 17:42 and Djoos (6' 169) playing 10:51

Pitt 2017 won the cup with Daley (5'11" 199) playing 19:07. Streit (5'11" 186) and Ruhwedel (5'11" 191) combined for 9 games playing ~14-15

Pitt 2016 won the cup with Daley (5'11" 199) playing 22:08

Hawks 2015 won the cup with Oduya (6' 191) playing 24:45 and 39 year old Timonen (5'10" 194) playing 8:40

Hawks 2013 won the cup with Oduya (6' 191) playing 22:45

Hell even Duncan Keith is 6'1" 192. Adam Fox is 5'11" 181, Jones 5'11" 185, Lundkvist 5'10" 187. Jones and Lundkvist are only 20 years old. Are we really believing that a magic inch is keeping Fox and Jones from winning a cup. Again, elite players. Fox is a Norris finalist. Kempny, Daley, and Oduya have never gotten a single vote.

Nah, if the goal is the playoffs, and to make noise in them, you make the move that betters your roster for them. If that's this week, next month, or at the deadline, I don't care. I just don't want to see a bunch of under 180-pounders on the blue line in the post season.

None of them are under 180. Fox is the lightest one. The two 20 year old rookies can easily get over 190 with a couple Ben Prentiss summers.

You still need a 2ndary player that can run the PP. Not sending Miller and Trouba back out there. That was a mess.

Imagine if, ummm... Fox has to miss a game for potential COVID exposure..., and you have no one to run either PP?

I think only Boston won a cup with a terrible PP in the playoffs.

None of them are under 180. Fox is the lightest one. The two 20 year old rookies can easily get over 190 with a couple Ben Prentiss summers.

I'm not buying the idea that Lundkvist weighs an ounce over 180lbs. Have you seen photos of him? He's fucking tiny. So is Zac Jones. They're incredibly small. Noiceably small. Not Torey Krug small. Small small.

You still need a 2ndary player that can run the PP. Not sending Miller and Trouba back out there. That was a mess.

 

Imagine if, ummm... Fox has to miss a game for potential COVID exposure..., and you have no one to run either PP?

I think only Boston won a cup with a terrible PP in the playoffs.

That's probably Lundkvist, with Jones the odd man out.