Who Liked Gallant and Who Likes Laviolette?

[Br4d]

Given we have a third of the season under our belt at this point I thought I would do a rough list of which players have flourished so far under Laviolette and which played better under GG.

 

It seems intuitive that north-south players will have had a better start under Laviolette whereas east-west players being given free reign to do whatever they wanted would have done better under GG.

 

So there are three groups here, Laviolette's guys, guys for whom it doesn't seem to have made a difference and then GG's guys.

 

Laviolette's guys: Panarin, Trocheck, Lafreniere, Trouba and Vesey.

 

Neutral guys: Kreider, Fox, Lindgren, Miller and Schneider.

 

GG's guys: Zibanejad, Goodrow, Chytil, Kakko and Shesterkin.

 

You can make an argument for Fox and Lindgren slipping to the GG group based largely on their defensive numbers at this point.  However they haven't been obviously lacking in performance or production the way Zibby and Igor have so it's a close call.

 

The north-south vs east-west thing is probably a bit overblown.  Panarin is still off to a great start and he was one of the main east-westers on the Rangers the last couple of years.  Miller and Schneider are/were moderately north-south and they've been good but not blooming under Laviolette, basically about the same as under GG.  Fox and Lindgren were east-west and they might have declined a bit under Laviolette.

 

It's interesting but it's almost like the Rangers have two groups of players that play different styles and they're having trouble meshing at this point.  Panarin has become a much more effective north-south player by the simple expedient of taking a lot more shots.  Every shot is a cycling pass that didn't happen.

[jsm7302]

I don't think it is easy to classify due to so many external factors in each players life on the ice and off. I think the Laviolette system leads to less east/west creativity due to faster moving open ice transitions as opposed to puck possession games in the O zone. 

 

I think Chytil and Kakko just had a tough start to the season and then got screwed with injuries. Goodrow could be just as good under Lavi but isn't playing as prominent of a role up the lineup.

 

The two left struggling from the GG era are Shesty. Shestys issues transcends the coaching change. Zibby may very well be less productive under a speedy transition game but again, it is so hard to make that assessment.

 

I think it's a no brainer that everyone in that locker room enjoys the winning more than the slumps and losing which were a part of the opening with GG each year. All in all the team under Lavi looks so much better than years past regardless of individual successes.

[The Dude]

I don't agree with who you classify as each coaches guys.

 

I don't think Laviolette is all that high on Vesey. Otherwise he'd have slid him up the lineup as he deserves.  

 

I think Laviolette likes Schneider a lot. Seems more involved in offensive plays that seem designed specifically for him.  GG seemed to get a little better defensive play or atleast some hard hits out of him, but Laviolette is definitely trying to utilize his offensive ability. 

 

I really don't think GG liked Kakko or Chytil very much, despite the occasional bump in icetime and kind words for their play on the kid line. GG would cut their ice in a heartbeat after one bad shift or questionable  give away. 

 

I think Laviolette treats everyone pretty equally. Doesn't have a favorite and has a pulse on who really doesn't have it going on any particular night. I'm just not getting why he's keeping Vesey on the 4th line, when the dude is really zipping around and making a difference on a majority of his shifts. Is there possibly an underlying dislike due to Vesey not signing with the Preds when Laviolette was coach? 

[Br4d]

I was more classifying who played best for each coach.  The list is pretty clearly broken down when you look at production.

[BrooksBurner]

I think it’s too early yet for the compare/contrast, but generally agree with the buckets of players to this point. Only comments I’d have are:

 

Vesey is a wash. He was as good last year.

 

Chytil is a bit N/A since he hasn’t played enough.

Listing Shesterkin is meaningless. We know it’s Allaire working with the goalies and whoever the head coach is doesn’t matter. I don’t give credit to GG for Shesty winning a Vezina, and I don’t give Lavi credit for Quick’s career being revived. It’s Benoit.

 

It’ll be interesting to see how things shake out. It’s definitely something to re-visit because players who are in the wrong bucket might be the guys pushed out if it doesn’t end well enough this season.

Edited December 15, 2023 by BrooksBurner

[mbob]

4 hours ago, The Dude said:

I'm just not getting why he's keeping Vesey on the 4th line, when the dude is really zipping around and making a difference on a majority of his shifts. Is there possibly an underlying dislike due to Vesey not signing with the Preds when Laviolette was coach? 

Could it be he’s tooling Vesey and once Lavi is satisfied Jimmy moves up to stay?  Like wax on wax off  I’d buy that over trolling him. 
 

Agree though, not seeing him moved up is head scratching, but he is a huge part of a very productive 4th line also. 

Edited December 15, 2023 by mbob

[Br4d]

Laviolette leans heavily on the 4th line in some games.  I don't think having Vesey there is any kind of negative judgement on his abilities.

 

Again, I'm not looking at who the coach likes I'm looking at which players are performing better in the new system and which are stepping down some.

 

Zibanejad is at the age where it could be a legitimate step down.  Early 30's is the first step down point.

[phillyb]

In before Pete. 

[The Dude]

59 minutes ago, Br4d said:

Laviolette leans heavily on the 4th line in some games.  I don't think having Vesey there is any kind of negative judgement on his abilities.

 

Again, I'm not looking at who the coach likes I'm looking at which players are performing better in the new system and which are stepping down some.

 

Zibanejad is at the age where it could be a legitimate step down.  Early 30's is the first step down point.

Step down?

 

23 points in 27 games. I'm not fully grasping the reason why people think Zibanejad is having a bad year. He's chugging along at almost a PPG. and he has yet to really get hot. The goals will come. 

 

Why aren't people all over Fox? Guy never scores goals.  He's gone 9 without 1. That would get anyone some shit. 

 

 

[BrooksBurner]

6 hours ago, The Dude said:

Step down?

 

23 points in 27 games. I'm not fully grasping the reason why people think Zibanejad is having a bad year. He's chugging along at almost a PPG. and he has yet to really get hot. The goals will come. 

 

Why aren't people all over Fox? Guy never scores goals.  He's gone 9 without 1. That would get anyone some shit. 

 

 

That’s only a 69 pt pace for Zib.

 

Fox is pacing 14 g and 86 pts.

[Sharpshooter]

Laviolette, because well, he's a much better coach.  I think some players will do better and some will do worse under certain coaches, that's just sports. Someone like Goodrow hasn't been as good and has been somewhat reduced with Lav, which makes the contract worse. Overall, though, I don't see a huge difference in player performance. Lafreniere looks pretty good every game, but Panarin had a lot to do with that. I just think Artemi is extra motivated this year given what happened last season. Good for him, but I'm not really going to credit the coach for that. One would assume they'd be better with a healthy Chytil, can't really fault the coach with that. With Igor's struggles you could say Quick's goaltending has saved the team to a degree. If we were getting just average or slightly below average performance from our backup, we'd be in a worse spot in the standings. I just think that's Allaire and also Quick for haviing a chip on his shoulder after what happened last year.

 

I don't know. I just prefer Laviolette, again, because he's the better coach with a good pedigree and I trust him more in big spots.

[Ozzy]

I still think there are more concepts to grasp onto with Laviolette.  We're still making old mistakes, and I think it may be a little early yet to fully judge Lavvy's work.  So far, with what we've been able to grasp has worked well, I just think there's a whole lot more to Lavvy than a 1-3-1, and a couple of forechecking/breakout plays or systems.

 

Lavvy has also had to deal with something Gallant didn't have to: Injuries

 

I think he's done a great job so far, and has really made it easier for players to play within their means, in a system that is created for the betterment of the team; a concept that defied Gallant.  I'm seriously thinking we really won't see the fruits of their current labor until the playoffs....and that's fine by me.

 

We're getting there a little at a time.  For the first time in a long while...There's a plan!

 

[Pete]

14 hours ago, phillyb said:

In before Pete. 

I find the entire premise of the thread baseless so I'm refraining from commenting, aside from that.

[Sharpshooter]

Ron Low is better than all of them.

 

/s

[RangersIn7]

1 hour ago, Sharpshooter said:

Ron Low is better than all of them.

 

/s

Never had a winning season as a HC, yet his teams in Edmonton scored huge 1st round playoff upsets over much better teams in consecutive years.

 Go figure.

[The Dude]

9 hours ago, BrooksBurner said:

That’s only a 69 pt pace for Zib.

 

Fox is pacing 14 g and 86 pts.

How is that a 69 point pace? He's a tick off a PPG and he is considered cold. 

 

Fox is lucky if he cracks 10 goals as that's the norm.  

[BrooksBurner]

35 minutes ago, The Dude said:

How is that a 69 point pace? He's a tick off a PPG and he is considered cold. 

 

Fox is lucky if he cracks 10 goals as that's the norm.  

It’s just math. I dunno. Lol.

[Br4d]

51 minutes ago, The Dude said:

How is that a 69 point pace? He's a tick off a PPG and he is considered cold. 

 

Fox is lucky if he cracks 10 goals as that's the norm.  

 

When you get a third of the way into the season it's not necessarily cold, it may just be the new normal.

[The Dude]

41 minutes ago, Br4d said:

 

When you get a third of the way into the season it's not necessarily cold, it may just be the new normal.

He's at almost a PPG!

 

NORMAL. 

[The Dude]

50 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

It’s just math. I dunno. Lol.

It's incorrect math. How did you get this number?

[BrooksBurner]

13 minutes ago, The Dude said:

It's incorrect math. How did you get this number?

So what you do is you take the number of points scored to date and divide by the number of games played to date, then you

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Scott]

[The Dude]

13 hours ago, BrooksBurner said:

So what you do is you take the number of points scored to date and divide by the number of games played to date, then you

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sideways or what? You're not being descriptive enough.  

 

Oh look he had 2 points last night. He must be on pace for just over 70 now. 

 

Predicting a players "pace" for such a hot and cold player isnt something you can take seriously. I  guess Edstrom iis pacing 54 goals then. Right? 

[BrooksBurner]

24 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Sideways or what? You're not being descriptive enough.  

 

Oh look he had 2 points last night. He must be on pace for just over 70 now. 

 

Predicting a players "pace" for such a hot and cold player isnt something you can take seriously. I  guess Edstrom iis pacing 54 goals then. Right? 

However you like it.

 

Yes, 73 points now.

 

Pace is meaningless without a sufficient sample size. It’s meaningful with a sufficient sample size.

[fletch]

I think you can make your first meaningful comparison in July.  I'm only interested in what this team does in the playoffs, we've seen their regular season performance has been fine.

 

Most teams gets a bump in the first 10-12 games with a new coach, because everything is exciting and new.  Starting with the Stars game the Rangers are an 8-5 team with an awfully small sample size.  Shesterkin has played 8 games in that stretch with a save percentage of .893 and GAA 3.67.   I'd say that's sample size in hitting a rough stretch (like all goalies do) rather than Gallant being a better coach for goalies than Laviolette.  But if you wanted to spin a story you could advance a narrative that Laviolette's faith in Quick has enabled him to have a career renaissance in New York, and Shesterkin's play is disrupted by the slight.  I won't make that narrative - it's small sample size to me.  Even though spinning a narrative based on selective stats and the eye test are forum staples.  

 

https://www.naturalstattrick.com/playerteams.php?fromseason=20232024&thruseason=20232024&stype=2&sit=all&score=all&stdoi=g&rate=n&team=ALL&pos=S&loc=B&toi=0&gpfilt=gpdate&fd=2023-11-20&td=2023-12-16&tgp=410&lines=single&draftteam=ALL