Do Rangers Profile as a Cup Contender? 5v5 Might Say Otherwise

[Phil]

Quote

The Rangers had ridden to the top of the league off their superb work on both ends of the specialty game. They were first in the NHL on the power play and fifth on the penalty kill. The combined special team coefficient of 115.8 was best in the league ahead of the Bruins’ 113.2.

 

Their work has allowed them to overcome a mediocre record at five-on-five in which they entered the match having scored just one more goal than they had allowed. When the game ended, that had been reversed, the Blueshirts now minus-1 at five-on-five. 

 

Quote

Do you know why that might be meaningful in assessing whether the Blueshirts fit the profile of a Stanley Cup champion? 

 

It is because only one team has won the Cup with a negative five-on-five differential since the NHL first expanded to 12 teams in 1967-68 and the playoffs increased from a two-round format. That team was the 2011-12 Kings, who allowed one more goal than they scored at five-on-five while slipping into the playoffs as the final seed in the West before storming through the tournament behind a young goaltender named Jonathan Quick. 

 

https://nypost.com/2024/01/02/sports/rangers-miss-opportunity-to-push-back-hurricanes-in-standings/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=nypost_sitebuttons

[Pete]

Well, now we have Quick, so shouldn't be a problem. 

[Vodka Drunkenski]

I’m failing to see structure that Laviolette was suppose to bring.

[Bugg]

Gonna need somebody that goes to the net, shoots and get dirty goals. Still too much overpassing and east/west nonsense. When better defensive teams take that away, need to force the issue. You can look at last night like a blip, but really it's gonna be a blueprint; Sens did the same thing. 

 

And Adam Fox needs to become a force, not just a nice player.

 

Certain Igor will be fine. 

[Pete]

12 minutes ago, Vodka Drunkenski said:

I’m failing to see structure that Laviolette was suppose to bring.

Then you're not watching.

[Morphinity 2.0]

I think it's too simple to point to one stat, especially one so devoid of context as 5-on-5 goal differential, and say they're not contenders.

 

They are who they are. They make their hay on the powerplay. It's not something that should just be tossed out. Yes the game is called differently in the playoffs, especially in playoff OT, but powerplays are still awarded. And I'll take a team that scores on 1 out of every 3 powerplays any day of the week. 

 

Their 5v5 play is improved over last year, and we saw that early. I think they've struggled a bit at 5v5 lately because they're really feeling the lack of quality depth. Brodzinski - Bonino - Cuylle is just not a good enough 3rd line.

 

 

[Pete]

1 minute ago, Bugg said:

Gonna need somebody that goes to the net, shoots and get dirty goals. Still too much overpassing and east/west nonsense. When better defensive teams take that away, need to force the issue. You can look at last night like a blip, but really it's gonna be a blueprint; Sens did the same thing. 

 

And Adam Fox needs to become a force, not just a nice player.

 

Certain Igor will be fine. 

I agree with you about that being he blueprint, however the ability to execute that over a 7 game series is what the playoffs are all about, and why coaching is so important. You can't just have GG sitting there drawing names out of a hat being the only change.

 

I have faith in this staff to instill an appropriate response. They got shelled by Toronto and a few days later shelled them right back.

 

Bonino filling in for Chytil is a massive loss at 5v5. It throws everything out of whack because it makes the lineup too top heavy. Kakko missing is a big defensive hole as well.

 

Get a C, get a RW (Wheeler isn't the answer long term), things will be fine.

[Phil]

5 minutes ago, Pete said:

I agree with you about that being he blueprint, however the ability to execute that over a 7 game series is what the playoffs are all about, and why coaching is so important. You can't just have GG sitting there drawing names out of a hat being the only change.

 

I have faith in this staff to instill an appropriate response. They got shelled by Toronto and a few days later shelled them right back.

 

Bonino filling in for Chytil is a massive loss at 5v5. It throws everything out of whack because it makes the lineup too top heavy. Kakko missing is a big defensive hole as well.

 

Get a C, get a RW (Wheeler isn't the answer long term), things will be fine.

 

11 minutes ago, Morphinity 2.0 said:

I think it's too simple to point to one stat, especially one so devoid of context as 5-on-5 goal differential, and say they're not contenders.

 

They are who they are. They make their hay on the powerplay. It's not something that should just be tossed out. Yes the game is called differently in the playoffs, especially in playoff OT, but powerplays are still awarded. And I'll take a team that scores on 1 out of every 3 powerplays any day of the week. 

 

Their 5v5 play is improved over last year, and we saw that early. I think they've struggled a bit at 5v5 lately because they're really feeling the lack of quality depth. Brodzinski - Bonino - Cuylle is just not a good enough 3rd line.

 

It's all of this. They're basically treading water at 5v5 because they're missing two top-six players and have had to back fill with an NHL journeyman fourth-line center as their third-line center, and a career AHLer who's found late-career success, but with limited offensive upside.

 

A legitimate third-line center alone would probably do wonders for this team. It really can't be understated how bad it is to have Bonino (or Goodrow) at 3C. They produce nothing.

 

If Chytil is out for the year, they should run back a similar approach they did a couple years back when they got Vatrano + Copp + Motte. There's no need for a "name," they just need to get real NHL players in.

[BrooksBurner]

This is the same team that it’s always been so far. There’s nothing different except for a better 3LD and slightly better depth on the wings. The best team in the league talk is premature and nonsense. First, there are 4-5 teams who are right with them in points, and second they are only a few wins better than the Islanders who are 3rd in the Metro. Barring significant buy in to actually playing a system, which is possible but missing right now, I’d give it 3-4 weeks before this team is teetering between Metro 3rd and a WC spot.

Edited January 3 by BrooksBurner

[Br4d]

1 hour ago, Vodka Drunkenski said:

I’m failing to see structure that Laviolette was suppose to bring.

 

I see the structure I just question whether too many of the Rangers players are too soft to work it to maximum potential.

 

Laviolette's pressers recently have overworked the word physicality.  This is a bit reminiscent of GG's tendency to talk about what the players know they have to do over and over again when that wasn't necessarily happening on the ice all that often.

[delneggs]

The Rangers biggest problem is lack of determination and lack of grit or jam or whatever you want to call it.  They would rather skate around the perimeter in the O zone and make behind the back passes and east/west passes all day long rather than crash the net on a consistent basis. They make life for the opponents D and goalies way to comfortable.  

 

In their own zone, they simply back in and let teams waltz on in and then just want to stick check and try to strip pucks that way or block shots. They don't hit anyone.  They don't stand teams up at the blue line, ever. Even Trouba is less physical this season and Lindgren has been domesticated by other teams targeting him. 

 

And they don't do much more than hurl insults at the other team when one of their own takes a cheap shot.  And they never get even.  They are just too nice for hockey. 

 

They will get bounced in round 1 if this is how they they think they can win a cup.   

[Sod16]

I've never seen a Rangers team whose loses are seemingly all so decisive.  There must be something deceptive or emphemeral in the good overall record when the loses are so decisive.  There is, however, an apparent consensus that a 3rd line center and 1st line RW at the deadline may change things considerably.

 

Isn't it irritating that we have this $3.6 m per year gritty player who's supposed to play wing or center and when you get an injury you can't use him as your third line center?

[Pete]

53 minutes ago, delneggs said:

The Rangers biggest problem is lack of determination and lack of grit or jam or whatever you want to call it.  They would rather skate around the perimeter in the O zone and make behind the back passes and east/west passes all day long rather than crash the net on a consistent basis. They make life for the opponents D and goalies way to comfortable.  

 

In their own zone, they simply back in and let teams waltz on in and then just want to stick check and try to strip pucks that way or block shots. They don't hit anyone.  They don't stand teams up at the blue line, ever. Even Trouba is less physical this season and Lindgren has been domesticated by other teams targeting him. 

 

And they don't do much more than hurl insults at the other team when one of their own takes a cheap shot.  And they never get even.  They are just too nice for hockey. 

 

They will get bounced in round 1 if this is how they they think they can win a cup.   

This post sounds like it's stuck in last season. 

[deejaid]

Looking back to the playoff series versus Carolina a couple of years ago, the guy that really stood out to me was Seth Jarvis.  I remember thinking at the time, “Why don’t we ever find players like this?”   The kid plays bigger than his size, has a nonstop motor, isn’t afraid to mix it up, and has some skill.  Reminds me of a young Brad Marchant.

 

Last nights game was a reminder of that.  Not that Jarvis had a standout game, but that the entire Carolina team buys into a team concept and play within their structure.  They don’t have the stars or names we have, but the team is better than the sum of its parts.

 

When will the Rangers have that swarming team mentality?   It’s never going to happen with Blake Wheeler on the top line, or on any line for that matter.  Maybe it’s just New York City.  NYC is built for stars, not a team mentality it seems.

 

 

I would love to see an injection of youthful energy with the call up of Othmann and Trivigno.  Even if they aren’t ready yet (and who knows if Trivigno will ever be), let’s wear opposing teams down with relentless forechecking and keep their stars off balance, exactly what was done to us by Carolina last night.

 

 

[delneggs]

5 minutes ago, Pete said:

This post sounds like it's stuck in last season. 

Last several seasons.  They have never really fixed the problem.  

[Vodka Drunkenski]

2 hours ago, Pete said:

Then you're not watching.

I’m watching

[Phil]

25 minutes ago, Pete said:

This post sounds like it's stuck in last season. 

 

19 minutes ago, delneggs said:

Last several seasons.  They have never really fixed the problem.  

 

Maybe, but I'm not sure it's entirely wrong. There's a big difference between how they want to play and the regular season and how they want to play and the post season (where PPs tend to dry up and physical play ratchets up). It's not even about brute force, either. It's more an issue of general will.

 

Right now we're stuck kinda hoping that the same roster with a different coach will produce a different result. That remains to be seen, but the evidence we have is kinda scant. Even if you look at Gallant year one, I'd argue unreal goaltending was the key to their success. They won in spite of not having very good 5v5 players or very many highlight postseason players.

[Br4d]

You can add Panarin scoring at 5v5 to great PP and strong goal-tending as the reasons the Rangers win.

 

Everything else is very 90 points-ish.

 

The reason the Rangers are off to a great start this year is Panarin scoring at 5v5 and playing a lot of north-south hockey.

Edited January 3 by Br4d

[Pete]

23 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

 

Maybe, but I'm not sure it's entirely wrong. There's a big difference between how they want to play and the regular season and how they want to play and the post season (where PPs tend to dry up and physical play ratchets up). It's not even about brute force, either. It's more an issue of general will.

 

Right now we're stuck kinda hoping that the same roster with a different coach will produce a different result. That remains to be seen, but the evidence we have is kinda scant. Even if you look at Gallant year one, I'd argue unreal goaltending was the key to their success. They won in spite of not having very good 5v5 players or very many highlight postseason players.

I'd argue the difference in the statistics is more about Shesterkin being ordinary this year. Imagine this team getting .935 goaltending, or even the .916 he gave you last year? He's currently being outplayed by Thatcher Demko.

 

https://edge.nhl.com/en/compare/goalies/20232024-regular-8477967-20232024-regular-8478048

 

Statistics are starting to trend towards the last 2 years but I'd point to goaltending and injuries being what the major difference is this season. You're all forgetting that for good portions of the season last year, the Rangers had guys like Tarasenko and Kane. What would this team be doing with those guys (or similar) instead of Wheeler, Brodinski, Bonino?

 

This team has worse players and is still just as good as last season. That says something. Get healthy or try to add the pieces you need. It shouldn't be that hard to improve on Bonino. Kakko can't possibly be worse, which is better than Brodzinski.

 

Vegas oddsmakers, who all know just as much as we do about sports and sports data have the Rangers ranked as a favorite. That also says something. Every team has holes. And all fans pick apart their own teams worse than others. I never really got that. Even last night it was all about how the Rangers sucked instead of Carolina probably playing their best game of the season. Tip your cap. It's not always that your team is awful. 

[Phil]

2 minutes ago, Pete said:

I'd argue the difference in the statistics is more about Shesterkin being ordinary this year. Imagine this team getting .935 goaltending, or even the .916 he gave you last year? He's currently being outplayed by Thatcher Demko.

 

https://edge.nhl.com/en/compare/goalies/20232024-regular-8477967-20232024-regular-8478048

 

Statistics are starting to trend towards the last 2 years but I'd point to goaltending and injuries being what the major difference is this season. You're all forgetting that for good portions of the season last year, the Rangers had guys like Tarasenko and Kane. What would this team be doing with those guys (or similar) instead of Wheeler, Brodinski, Bonino?

 

This team has worse players and is still just as good as last season. That says something. Get healthy or try to add the pieces you need. It shouldn't be that hard to improve on Bonino. Kakko can't possibly be worse, which is better than Brodzinski.

 

Vegas oddsmakers, who all know just as much as we do about sports and sports data have the Rangers ranked as a favorite. That also says something. Every team has holes. And all fans pick apart their own teams worse than others. I never really got that. Even last night it was all about how the Rangers sucked instead of Carolina probably playing their best game of the season. Tip your cap. It's not always that your team is awful. 

 

No disagreement. I'm just saying that @delneggs isn't completely off the mark on his diagnosis. They aren't a heavy team really, at all. That might be OK, but it's gonna mean they're gonna need to keep their offensive firing on the PP and lean on rock-solid goaltending like they have the last two years. Right now, that last point is a bit of a question mark (with Shesterkin).

 

He's .906 this year, well low of his career .922.

[Drew a Penalty]

3 hours ago, Morphinity 2.0 said:

I think it's too simple to point to one stat, especially one so devoid of context as 5-on-5 goal differential, and say they're not contenders.

 

They are who they are. They make their hay on the powerplay. It's not something that should just be tossed out. Yes the game is called differently in the playoffs, especially in playoff OT, but powerplays are still awarded. And I'll take a team that scores on 1 out of every 3 powerplays any day of the week. 

 

Their 5v5 play is improved over last year, and we saw that early. I think they've struggled a bit at 5v5 lately because they're really feeling the lack of quality depth. Brodzinski - Bonino - Cuylle is just not a good enough 3rd line.

 

 

 

 

It's all this. Even Dom Luchadorxray at the Atheltic, an analytics purist, has caved to the notion that the Rangers are a model for a successful team because of their sustained success as a special teams and goaltending-propelled team. The question is whether they're the make of a championship-winning team.

 

Quote

There are times when it’s OK to question whether a team can sustain its unconventional wins. But those questions are easily answered the longer a team can prove the strategy as conventional for itself. This is the third year pulling this off where the Rangers have had arguably a top-10 power play and penalty kill or better. That power play looks especially lethal with the way Artemi Panarin is playing and how they’ve looked with Fox at the helm (16.2 goals per 60). Combine that with a goalie you can practically set your watch to being elite and that’s enough.

 

In the earlier days of the analytics era, it felt like there were limited pathways to victory. In a lower-scoring environment, controlling the game at five-on-five meant controlling the league. That’s changed of late. More goals, stronger power plays and top-of-the-league parity have created more avenues toward success. The Rangers have consistently shown that in the last three seasons.

 

Puck possession is still king and we don’t want to be hasty in anointing a team for doing things differently. The difference between any questions about the Rangers in 2021-22 and now is they’ve built a track record. It works, enough to be a consistent 100-plus point team.

 

Now comes the hard part: Proving it works enough to win it all. With room for improvement at five-on-five and with their star goalie, their chance looks stronger than ever.

 

https://theathletic.com/5134948/2023/12/14/16-stats-rangers-faber-reinhart/

 

I think depth is by far the biggest hindrance at the moment. Beyond the third line being the equivalent of some AHL first lines, they've still got Wheeler playing on a top line that's beyond his physical capabilities. There's only so much this team can do when two guys above 35 are filling for two guys below 25. Bonino and Wheeler just don't have the legs to be the contributors they're being asked to be.

[The Dude]

1 hour ago, Sod16 said:

Isn't it irritating that we have this $3.6 m per year gritty player who's supposed to play wing or center and when you get an injury you can't use him as your third line center?

It's infuriating.  To think they chose Goodrow and Nemeth over Buchnevich. It one of only 2 bad moves by Drury. 

 

They even have an A on Goodrows jersey. The guy has been getting progressively more useless as the years go by. I thought Laviolette would tap into that gutsy, pain in the ass, warrior that we thought we were getting when the Rangers made that decision. He's been wildly inconsistent with the aggressive play and is really a no show on a nightly basis. 

 

I know some fans here like him, but I've seen enough to know that this was a bad signing.  The player is not only -not -living up to the contract . He's not even close to useful or close to the difference maker hecwas with Tampa. 

 

I hope they can move that contract this season or over the summer.  Goodrow has been a big giant flop. 

[delneggs]

2 hours ago, Phil said:

 

 

Maybe, but I'm not sure it's entirely wrong. There's a big difference between how they want to play and the regular season and how they want to play and the post season (where PPs tend to dry up and physical play ratchets up). It's not even about brute force, either. It's more an issue of general will.

 

Right now we're stuck kinda hoping that the same roster with a different coach will produce a different result. That remains to be seen, but the evidence we have is kinda scant. Even if you look at Gallant year one, I'd argue unreal goaltending was the key to their success. They won in spite of not having very good 5v5 players or very many highlight postseason players.

You would hope a new coach could alter their mindset some and get them to play a more effective style of hockey. Doesn't appear that it has however.  They still love the perimeter and east/west cross ice passes rather than going to the scoring areas in front of the net and battling to score dirty goals.  It does not seem to be in their DNA I guess.  They are also way to soft defensively. I can count on one hand the times they stepped up at the blue line this season and took away a rushers time and space, or god forbid, hit them.  Fox has gotten even softer, if that's possible, and as I said before, Lindgren seems gun shy now and even Trouba is less physical.  IMO, there is no way a team this soft finds success in the playoffs.  They have the size to change that, but do they have the heart and will?  My guess is no.  So they will feast on other less skilled soft teams and lose to skilled teams that forecheck them hard and hit them consistently.   

[RJWantsTheCup]

First team to 50 points.  How are they not a contender?

[Scott]

Having a great regular season makes for a fun ride for sure, and it beats the Wheels off the alternative. But as far as having the most points they pointed out in a post game 2 games back only 2 of the last 17ish (Vali wasn't exactly sure) Presidents trophy winners won the stanley cup and more than a handful have failed spectacularly in the playoffs.