Jump to content
  • Join us — it's free!

    We are the premiere internet community for New York Rangers news and fan discussion. Don't wait — join the forum today!

IGNORED

Powerplay Structure


Lafreniere or Trocheck on PP1?  

21 members have voted

  1. 1. Lafreniere or Trocheck on PP1?



Recommended Posts

Breaking this out into another thread rather than discussing it in "Ryan Carpenter signs for $750k" lol, because it's probably an opinionated topic.

 

On the one hand, I'd love to get Lafreniere some PP1 time. On the other hand, Trocheck is a better fit in the bumper slot with Panarin on the right boards looking to pass. Making the bumper a left handed shot would look to receive a pass from Zibanejad on the left, and his bread and butter is one timers so I don't think that's as good of a set up - though you could make an argument of a fake one timer followed by quick feed to a lefty shot towards the middle for a one timer there instead.

 

Interested to see where people fall on this.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Long live the King said:

Honestly don't think it matters.  Neither will have too much of an impact on PP1.  Strome had 14 pp points.  Zib 28 and CK, Fox, Panarin all in the 30's.  Therefore, I voted Laf on PP1, so Trocheck can take draws for PP2.


I think it could have a decent impact. If teams are cheating Zibanejad’s side, which they were doing all playoffs, there may be more room for Panarin to feed Trocheck rather than going around the top to Fox to Zibanejad, or directly full cross ice to Zibanejad.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, rmc51 said:

Breaking this out into another thread rather than discussing it in "Ryan Carpenter signs for $750k" lol, because it's probably an opinionated topic.

 

On the one hand, I'd love to get Lafreniere some PP1 time. On the other hand, Trocheck is a better fit in the bumper slot with Panarin on the right boards looking to pass. Making the bumper a left handed shot would look to receive a pass from Zibanejad on the left, and his bread and butter is one timers so I don't think that's as good of a set up - though you could make an argument of a fake one timer followed by quick feed to a lefty shot towards the middle for a one timer there instead.

 

Interested to see where people fall on this.

 

I think all of this is well thought out and logical. In spite of it all, I still vote Lafreniere to PP1 because I think his individual progress is so much more important than trying to nail down the best strategic plan based on stick position. Skilled players will find a way. He's a skilled player and he needs that time to continue to grow. The future success of the team hinges too much on him finding a deeper scoring touch to not go this route right out of the gate.

  • Like 1
  • Bullseye 1
  • Applause 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Phil said:

 

I think all of this is well thought out and logical. In spite of it all, I still vote Lafreniere to PP1 because I think his individual progress is so much more important than trying to nail down the best strategic plan based on stick position. Skilled players will find a way. He's a skilled player and he needs that time to continue to grow. The future success of the team hinges too much on him finding a deeper scoring touch to not go this route right out of the gate.


I agree they need to develop Lafreniere. I just don’t know if that’s PP1 in the bumper spot. What would help Lafreniere the most is probably to be in a position on the PP where the puck is on his stick to make plays. Either the left or right boards and they’re not moving Zibanejad or Panarin for obvious reasons. There is another path here and that’s simply to play PP2 more and have Lafreniere in a prime spot on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, rmc51 said:

I agree they need to develop Lafreniere. I just don’t know if that’s PP1 in the bumper spot. What would help Lafreniere the most is probably to be in a position on the PP where the puck is on his stick to make plays. Either the left or right boards and they’re not moving Zibanejad or Panarin for obvious reasons. There is another path here and that’s simply to play PP2 more and have Lafreniere in a prime spot on it.

 

I'm OK with this, as well, though I'll point out again that the reason for PP1's success last season was largely based on the amount of time on ice they got. They scored numerous goals by tiring out the opposing PK to open lanes by being on the ice for 90 seconds instead of 60. So there's an inherent danger in limiting their time to elevate more time for PP2, which will be, by design, less potent anyway.

 

If it's me, the first thing I try is just putting Lafreniere on PP1, be it in the bumper or not. If it fails, reevaluate, and revisit the idea of shaving seconds from PP1 to elevate PP2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Long live the King said:

Honestly don't think it matters.  Neither will have too much of an impact on PP1.  Strome had 14 pp points.  Zib 28 and CK, Fox, Panarin all in the 30's.  Therefore, I voted Laf on PP1, so Trocheck can take draws for PP2.

 

If Lafreniere added Strome's 14 PP points instead of his 2, he'd be at 24 goals and 19 assists for 43 points, and I think we'd be a bit more reassured with his progress. 

Edited by Cash or Czech
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

I'm OK with this, as well, though I'll point out again that the reason for PP1's success last season was largely based on the amount of time on ice they got. They scored numerous goals by tiring out the opposing PK to open lanes by being on the ice for 90 seconds instead of 60. So there's an inherent danger in limiting their time to elevate more time for PP2, which will be, by design, less potent anyway.

 

If it's me, the first thing I try is just putting Lafreniere on PP1, be it in the bumper or not. If it fails, reevaluate, and revisit the idea of shaving seconds from PP1 to elevate PP2.

I'd also point out that there is absolutely no good reason to change the Powerplay time balance when you're clicking at 25%. So when we're discussing things like "oh they'll run PP2 or whatever" - that's not really a thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, LindG1000 said:

I'd also point out that there is absolutely no good reason to change the Powerplay time balance when you're clicking at 25%. So when we're discussing things like "oh they'll run PP2 or whatever" - that's not really a thing.

No. The issue has been that PP1 is all they had.

They stacked the PP unit, and once it was up, they had random guys go out. Go gettem Lafreniere - McKegg - Reaves, then Rooney - Chytil - Kakko, then some reason half of the first line. It takes 10 minutes to get back to a regular line rotation. You know what that effects? 5v5 numbers. Not to mention all the times Panarin, Zibanejad, Fox and Kreider were gassed at the end of games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, josh said:

No. The issue has been that PP1 is all they had.

They stacked the PP unit, and once it was up, they had random guys go out. Go gettem Lafreniere - McKegg - Reaves, then Rooney - Chytil - Kakko, then some reason half of the first line. It takes 10 minutes to get back to a regular line rotation. You know what that effects? 5v5 numbers. Not to mention all the times Panarin, Zibanejad, Fox and Kreider were gassed at the end of games.

 

A 25% PP means that if you get 4 full powerplay opportunities a game, and you're rolling PP1 out for 6 of those 8 minutes, you're getting a goal. You do not fuck with that without a damn good reason.

I'd rather gassed players and a win than somewhat less tired players and overtime. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, rmc51 said:

Breaking this out into another thread rather than discussing it in "Ryan Carpenter signs for $750k" lol, because it's probably an opinionated topic.

 

On the one hand, I'd love to get Lafreniere some PP1 time. On the other hand, Trocheck is a better fit in the bumper slot with Panarin on the right boards looking to pass. Making the bumper a left handed shot would look to receive a pass from Zibanejad on the left, and his bread and butter is one timers so I don't think that's as good of a set up - though you could make an argument of a fake one timer followed by quick feed to a lefty shot towards the middle for a one timer there instead.

 

Interested to see where people fall on this.

 

 

Is this a "who do you want" poll? Or a "what do you think will happen" poll? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, LindG1000 said:

 

A 25% PP means that if you get 4 full powerplay opportunities a game, and you're rolling PP1 out for 6 of those 8 minutes, you're getting a goal. You do not fuck with that without a damn good reason.

I'd rather gassed players and a win than somewhat less tired players and overtime. 

You are under the assumption the 2nd unit wont score.

I posted 2 units that would both be very productive.

 

And again, your PP% might go down to 24.8, but your ES scoring will increase, instead of hovering around 20th in the league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, RJWantsTheCup said:

They are taking Panarin off the 1st unit if favor of Chytil?

That isn't ever happening.

Then flip them.

It's 2 top units.

 

Panarin gets his, Zibanejad gets his, instead of them fighting for the same spot. Let them both successfully dominate a unit.

 

I mean, having a shit PP2 unit didnt work.

Zibanejad and Panarin are both extremely successful on their own lines. I think it's a stretch to think either needs one another for the PP to be successful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LindG1000 said:

I'd also point out that there is absolutely no good reason to change the Powerplay time balance when you're clicking at 25%. So when we're discussing things like "oh they'll run PP2 or whatever" - that's not really a thing.

 

Yup. Because PP2 isn't really a thing. It's basically a temporary offensive line that gets very limited PP time once PP1 is gassed as play returns to 5v5 and lines go back to their normal rotation. It's why I was saying above that I don't really like the idea of taking time away from PP1 just to give more time to PP2. Goals are often scored by the PP1 unit specifically because they play 90+ seconds. It gasses the PK which creates confusion and opens lanes and open areas of ice. I'm really not interested in chipping away at that to maybe, hopefully, get a semi-productive PP2 with less lethal offensive players when you can just add the guy you want to PP1 and not over think it. Let the skilled players figure it out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, josh said:

Then flip them.

It's 2 top units.

 

Panarin gets his, Zibanejad gets his, instead of them fighting for the same spot. Let them both successfully dominate a unit.

 

I mean, having a shit PP2 unit didnt work.

Zibanejad and Panarin are both extremely successful on their own lines. I think it's a stretch to think either needs one another for the PP to be successful.

 

They don't, but PPs don't generally run long enough to make PP2 matter that much. I'm not opposed to this, specifically because they both play the same spot on it if you want them at their best, but I'm loathe to just cut minutes from PP1 at all unless they think they have to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

They don't, but PPs don't generally run long enough to make PP2 matter that much. I'm not opposed to this, specifically because they both play the same spot on it if you want them at their best, but I'm loathe to just cut minutes from PP1 at all unless they think they have to.

Cut minutes? More like earn minutes.

 

Regular shifts are 45 - 1 min.

 

I'm also fine with PP1 going out, scoring in the first half, and then sending out your 2nd line - who will be rested - instead of always sending out a mix of bottom 6 forwards after every power play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, josh said:

Cut minutes? More like earn minutes.

 

Regular shifts are 45 - 1 min.

 

I'm also fine with PP1 going out, scoring in the first half, and then sending out your 2nd line - who will be rested - instead of always sending out a mix of bottom 6 forwards after every power play.

 

That's true. That point, specifically, is more of a justified reason to do this. PP2 becomes a version of a normal top-six ES line to minimize the transition back to ES play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, josh said:

Cut minutes? More like earn minutes.

 

Regular shifts are 45 - 1 min.

 

I'm also fine with PP1 going out, scoring in the first half, and then sending out your 2nd line - who will be rested - instead of always sending out a mix of bottom 6 forwards after every power play.

But who goes out when neither unit scores?  The 4th line every time?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Y'all are missing the point... It's not about Panarin and Zib being split or PP1 vs 2.

 

Whatever unit Fox and Kreider are on is going to stay out at least 1:20.

 

Considering how we generally only score on the PP, I'm inclined to let the 25% unit stay intact. 

  • TroCheckmark 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×
×
  • Create New...