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

Been a Big Fan of Gallant but Man, This Team Can't Score Even Strength


Shesty Cola

Recommended Posts

Probably the largest problem we saw most of last season and the first portion of this season still remains. We simply have to labor way too much with all this talent to score points 5v5. This was also magnified in the playoffs. Gallant seems to be the opposite of Quinn. If there was one thing Quinn did fairly well was get this team scoring goals. Problem was his teams werent good at much else. Gallants teams for the most part compete really hard, are intense and play great on the PP,  but man the 5 on 5 stuff just doesn't generate enough goals.

Edited by Shesty Cola
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Shesty Cola changed the title to Been a Big Fan of Gallant but Man This Team Can't Score Even Strength

5v5 Goals For Rankings

 

Quinn

 

18-19: 26th

19-20: 11th (Note: Panarin’s first season)

20-21: 9th

 

Gallant

 

‘21-‘22: 19th (Note: Buchnevich gone)

‘22-‘23: 22nd

 

I think it’s important to highlight acquisitions and departures because it’s not all exclusively about the coach. The season before being traded, Buchnevich was the top forward on the team in 5v5 goals by a healthy margin, and 2nd behind Panarin in 5v5 pts. So they lost their best 5v5 goal scorer, their second best 5v5 point producer, and replaced him with Blais and Kakko. How has that gone?

Edited by rmc51
  • TroCheckmark 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, rmc51 said:

5v5 Goals For Rankings

 

Quinn

 

18-19: 26th

19-20: 11th (Note: Panarin’s first season)

20-21: 9th

 

Gallant

 

‘21-‘22: 19th (Note: Buchnevich gone)

‘22-‘23: 22nd

 

I think it’s important to highlight acquisitions and departures because it’s not all exclusively about the coach. The season before being traded, Buchnevich was the top forward on the team in 5v5 goals by a healthy margin, and 2nd behind Panarin in 5v5 pts. So they lost their best 5v5 goal scorer, their second best 5v5 point producer, and replaced him with Blais and Kakko. How has that gone?

I understand why they had to move Buch, and we all know the return was underwhelming to say the least... But I'm shocked at how much Buch meant to Zib and CK. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, RangersIn7 said:

It’s rough right now, and honestly I don’t necessarily get why. They should be scoring more 5v5

 

But I think maybe it’s more of an anomaly.

 

The possession metrics and underlying numbers are pretty good or better.

They need a little puck luck and a hot streak

This stuff usually normalizes by now. The pattern if not in line with what the peripheral stats suggest should have equilibriated...but it hasn't.

 

5v5 Goals Quinn vs GG Rankings

 

Quinn

19-20: 11th 

20-21: 9th

 

Gallant

‘21-‘22: 19th 

‘22-‘23: 22nd

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Pete said:

I understand why they had to move Buch, and we all know the return was underwhelming to say the least... But I'm shocked at how much Buch meant to Zib and CK. 


Yeah I mean you know I was a Buch guy. I wanted to keep him and work out the cap later. But the route chosen was also perfectly logical. In many ways it was even a more logical one. It just hasn’t worked. Is what it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Shesty Cola said:

This stuff usually normalizes by now. The pattern if not in line with what the peripheral stats suggest should have equilibriated...but it hasn't.

 

5v5 Goals Quinn vs GG Rankings

 

Quinn

19-20: 11th 

20-21: 9th

 

Gallant

‘21-‘22: 19th 

‘22-‘23: 22nd

True enough. But the underlying numbers were not good last season. They got carried by Igor and the PP.

This year, those numbers are better. And by a good margin. 
 

That’s what I’m getting at. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Rangers stickhandle and pass the puck extremely well.  Like Eurozone well.

 

Nobody shoots the puck!  5v5 winds up looking like a powerplay in the offensive zone most of the time except nobody shoots the puck!

 

Somehow this is all Panarin's fault.  Haven't quite figured it out yet but I think everybody in the top 9 is trying to emulate Panarin's style and the bottom 3 would be also but their stickhandling and passing skills aren't quite up to the burden.

Edited by Br4d
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The weird part here is that they're 11th in xGF, 7th in xG%, but just 21th in GF. They're 6th (worst) in "Goals differential above expected" with -7.05.

 

It's hard to blame the coach when the underlying numbers looks good, but they just keep missing chances. You can critique his usage of some players, but I think overall he's done a decent job to get the offense going.

 

The 5v5 defence is another topic tho. It wasn't good last year either, but then Shesterkin bailed them out. Shesterkin having a slow start + bad 5v5 defence + lots of bad puck luck and finishing is a recipe for disaster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc said:

The weird part here is that they're 11th in xGF, 7th in xG%, but just 21th in GF. They're 6th (worst) in "Goals differential above expected" with -7.05.

 

It's hard to blame the coach when the underlying numbers looks good, but they just keep missing chances. You can critique his usage of some players, but I think overall he's done a decent job to get the offense going.

 

The 5v5 defence is another topic tho. It wasn't good last year either, but then Shesterkin bailed them out. Shesterkin having a slow start + bad 5v5 defence + lots of bad puck luck and finishing is a recipe for disaster.

There comes a point where you have to disregard the fancy stats and trust what you're seeing on the ice. 

 

The analytics are great for confirming or disproving a hypothesis, and they can give you some information on "why" or "how" but ultimately the game is played on 200 x 85 and what your eyes tell you matters more than what spreadsheets do.

 

This team is passionless, confused, disorganized in all 3 zones, and when you can only manage to score when you're outnumbering your opponent, you have not mastered the game. 

 

It was a problem last year, masked by some guys having career years. Now it's alarming. 

Edited by Pete
  • The Chyt! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Pete said:

There comes a point where you have to disregard the fancy stats and trust what you're seeing on the ice. 

 

The analytics are great for confirming or disproving a hypothesis, and they can give you some information on "why" or "how" but ultimately the game is played on 200 x 85 and what your eyes tell you matters more than what spreadsheets do.

 

This team is passionless, confused, disorganized in all 3 zones, and when you can only manage to score when you're outnumbering your opponent, you have not mastered the game. 

 

It was a problem last year, masked by some guys having career years. Now it's alarming. 

Yeah I don't disagree with that. I've only watched 50% of the games so far, so maybe I've dodged the worst games, but I don't think it's as bad it's made out to be. The few losses I've seen I felt we deserved more and there's been some very solid wins (mainly in the beginning tho).

 

I agree it looks a bit passionless and disorganized at times, the last minutes vs Sharks was a perfect example of that, but I feel like it's something they should be able to turn around. If they got dominated every game, while every player played close to their best I would be a lot more worried.

 

I guess what I'm trying to say is that my "eye-test" mainly matches the stats. We've played decent/good hockey for the most part, while being really unlucky. Again, I might have dodged the worst games, so I might be wrong here.

 

What really worries me is Lafreniere and Kakko. I really thought this would be the season at least one of them really broke out, but it's been exactly the same as before. We're just not gonna get anywhere without them two becoming impactful top 6 players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Disorganized is the best adjective to describe the on ice product. It looks like they gutted the chemistry that flowed through their veins last year. 

 

I think they will get it together but in the mean time, they need to figure out a RW scoring threat option. *Hint* It isn't currently on the roster**.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Phil changed the title to Been a Big Fan of Gallant but Man, This Team Can't Score Even Strength

The fancy stats also don’t lie in the playoffs, which we found out the hard way last year. This team has plenty of problems I just think our 5v5 production is not close to one of them.

 

being passionless and disorganized, however, is different, as is the awful team defense 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Valriera said:

The fancy stats also don’t lie in the playoffs, which we found out the hard way last year. This team has plenty of problems I just think our 5v5 production is not close to one of them.

 

being passionless and disorganized, however, is different, as is the awful team defense 

The issue is that the only thing they produce is chances, they don't produce goals. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pete said:

The issue is that the only thing they produce is chances, they don't produce goals. 

But we can’t go from last year, saying “they’re bad at 5v5 because the fancy stats say so and that’s why they lost against tampa” (which was true) to this year saying “they’re bad at 5v5 because even though the fancy stats say they aren’t they can’t score”. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing that has stuck with me since the Gallant hiring is the lack of communication between Gallant and his players when he was first hired.  I can’t remember if it was Mollie Walker or Brooksie or Vince that reported that when Gallant was hired he didn’t contact any of his new players and said something along the lines of “I’ll meet them at camp”.

 

I mean I get that he is different than Quinn in his approach, but does Gallant expect too much autonomy  within the locker and this team just isn’t capable of holding each other accountable and Gallant is too hands off?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Valriera said:

But we can’t go from last year, saying “they’re bad at 5v5 because the fancy stats say so and that’s why they lost against tampa” (which was true) to this year saying “they’re bad at 5v5 because even though the fancy stats say they aren’t they can’t score”. 

We can absolutely do that, with context. Why can't we?

 

Issues from last season...carrying over.

 

Bleeding chances 5v5 ✅ aka can't defend

Can't score 5v5✅ They're getting chances, still can't score, net result is same

Reliance on otherworldy goaltending ✅ not getting it this season

Not enough depth scoring ✅

Not enough actual scoring from the kids ✅

 

Bottom 3rd of the league in HDCA, Scoring chances against, xGA, shots against....It ain't a good look.

 

Edited by Pete
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, deejaid said:

One thing that has stuck with me since the Gallant hiring is the lack of communication between Gallant and his players when he was first hired.  I can’t remember if it was Mollie Walker or Brooksie or Vince that reported that when Gallant was hired he didn’t contact any of his new players and said something along the lines of “I’ll meet them at camp”.

 

I mean I get that he is different than Quinn in his approach, but does Gallant expect too much autonomy  within the locker and this team just isn’t capable of holding each other accountable and Gallant is too hands off?

 

 

Good points, but it's strange because he's known to be a players coach and takes on the "just one of the guys" mold.

 

Yet, his approach doesn't add up. How can he not be reaching these guys, or have a pulse for the locker room, yet be their best bud or act like he's right on the ice with them as a cheerleader?  Is that his extent of coaching? No fundamentals? No discipline for any sort of system? No accountability unless you're a rookie? 

 

There gotta be some form of coaching. No? Can a guy be as successful as he's been, just by being a cheerleader? No. Right?  He does coach.  Doesn't he? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Passionless is the best adjective to me.  Dirty goals don't go into slumps.  Going to the net and feasting on rebounds may not be pretty but all they require is the will to do so.  The Rangers can look so damn good when things are clicking but when they aren't they look disinterested.  Too much skill on this team and not enough will.  It's not a new problem, it's one they have chose to ignore for the most part.

  • Keeps it 100 1
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...