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

[Ozzy]

26 minutes ago, RJWantsTheCup said:

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

 

We're bored today +  6-1 loss = we suck again!  LOL

 

Rangers Math

[Valriera]

Goodrow is our third line center. The Goodrow/Vesey/Pitlick line is the third line. Whatever abomination that includes Bonino, Brodzinsky, and Cuylle is the fourth line, whether that is how it appears on the lineup sheet or not. 

 

Honestly I look at our roster and record and I'm scared if I'm any team in the league. We are out two top six players, one of them is a second overall, a bad one I'll give you but he's an nhl caliber top six forward, and our usually dominant starting goalie has mostly sucked balls all year, and we are still the best team in the league. Still. Any team can beat any other team on any given night like what Carolina did to us last night where they came in and executed a perfect game, credit to them, but across a seven game series I am terrified of the New York Rangers this year.

 

So to answer the question, yes, we do profile as a cup contender already, and I would argue they should consider themselves runaway favorites if we are healthy (or replace Chytil) and if Shesterkin finds his game. Otherwise, ya, we'll have to rely on some goaltending and powerplay to get the job done, which is totally fine but not ideal.  

[The Dude]

2 hours ago, delneggs said:

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.   

Meh. They go through spurts,  where they do all the things that you just listed. The coaching staff has altered their mindset.  Lets remember, they're only just about to the half way mark under a new coach.

 

Laviolette has obviously installed a system.  We have seen it work. We've seen the difference. Their consistency is the "issue". They're not going to be perfect every game. No team has won every game.  

 

Old habits and a bit of a weakness have been creeping back into games. This should be expected. Can't win em all. 

 

Do I wish the Rangers had a meaner and more aggressive roster? Sure. But that's not to say that this roster hasn't played some top notch hockey that CAN win out in the playoffs. We've seen that it's in them. Just need to work on the consistency and obviously need a bit higher caliber forwards to fill in for injuries.  

 

The sky is nowhere near falling.  I have tons of confidence in most of this teams top players and in this coaching staff.  Let's all take a step back from the ledge. 

[The Dude]

5 hours ago, deejaid said:

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.

 

 

The season series is tied 1-1. Let's stop acting like this is a team that owns the Rangers. They kinda don't.  It's pretty even really. 

 

Who won that playoff series 2 years ago? The Rangers had their number and that was with shitty GG as coach. 

 

Carolina hasn't won a thing. Infact they disappoint every post season.  The Rangers have had better success in the playoffs in the last 2 seasons. Carolina just isn’t some perfect model of a team. 

 

Florida on the other hand.   

Edited January 3 by The Dude

[fletch]

My first question is how close are power play percentages in the regular season and post-season?  Some work but you could see how much of a correlation there is.

 

More generally is how predictive is regular season team and player performance for postseason performance?  

 

One answer to this question would be to do a scatter plot of regular season wins and number of rounds advanced in the playoffs.  You would be trying to assess how tightly correlated are regular season success and post-season success, or alternatively how little relationship is there between regular season and post-season performance.  That's a lot of work.

 

Here are the Stanley Cup champions and number of regular season points.  You get President's Trophy winners and wild card entries - more top seeds than lower seeds, but no definitive answer.

https://www.hockey-reference.com/awards/stanley.html

 

It's even harder to try and tie player post-season performance to regular season performance because of small sample size (few games until you get about 3 rounds deep) so players may go through scoring droughts or get lots of points, without a bunch of games to smooth things out.  A high-volume shot taker is likely to take more shots, some defensemen are more likely to pinch, some lines are more likely to cycle the puck than try tic-tac-toe passing - you'd expect more carry over from regular season to post-season, without knowing if the tactics would experience the same level of success in the post-season as the regular season.

 

I'd suggest that players work harder in a playoff game, whether it's defensive marking, blocking shots, hitting, back-checking on defense, or shooting/passing/cycling the puck in the offensive end.  There's more attention to detail in a playoff game than a mid-week regular season game.

 

I question how predictive any regular season trends are for the postseason, because it's hard to measure how much better a team will play in the post-season than in the regular season.  Can most only go from 10 to 11, are there a few teams that can go from 10 to 12, and 1 or 2 that can go from 10 to 13?  How many players are injured, battling a tweak, or worn down?  How does attrition during a playoff run effect one team more than another?  How do 2 teams' styles matchup in a playoff series, and who is able to dictate style of play in a game more frequently?  Who gets a lucky break?  Which team gets a player making a game-changing play?  Which team gets an inspiration and becomes a 'team of destiny' and outperforms expectations?

 

I'm skeptical of any article that says one factor determines a team's fate in the postseason, hockey is too complicated to simplify that much.

 

 

[The Dude]

5 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.

PPs DONT dry up though. It's not 1998. The refs aren't putting the whistles away and letting the boys play.

 

If anything,  it IS a special teams war in the playoffs.  Florida took 115 penalties in the playoffs last season. The Rangers took 38 and that was just in 7 games...

 

https://www.statmuse.com/nhl/ask/nhl-most-penalties-team-2023-stanley-cup-playoffs

 

A team can absolutely depend on it's PP to carry the weight in the playoffs.  Obviously ES scoring would be great too. It's not a life or death matter like some suggest. There's plenty of penalties in the playoffs in today's NHL. Let's let that sink in a bit. 

 

 

Edited January 3 by The Dude

[delneggs]

1 hour ago, The Dude said:

Meh. They go through spurts,  where they do all the things that you just listed. The coaching staff has altered their mindset.  Lets remember, they're only just about to the half way mark under a new coach.

 

Laviolette has obviously installed a system.  We have seen it work. We've seen the difference. Their consistency is the "issue". They're not going to be perfect every game. No team has won every game.  

 

Old habits and a bit of a weakness have been creeping back into games. This should be expected. Can't win em all. 

 

Do I wish the Rangers had a meaner and more aggressive roster? Sure. But that's not to say that this roster hasn't played some top notch hockey that CAN win out in the playoffs. We've seen that it's in them. Just need to work on the consistency and obviously need a bit higher caliber forwards to fill in for injuries.  

 

The sky is nowhere near falling.  I have tons of confidence in most of this teams top players and in this coaching staff.  Let's all take a step back from the ledge. 

No where near a ledge.  They are a very good team.  The point I am making is they don't have what it takes to be successful come playoffs or win a cup.  Not enough grit/jam/nastiness/whatever.  COULD they be those things?  Of coarse, anyone can, but you have to want to, and I have seen enough of this core to know, they don't want it that bad and are not willing to get dirty to win a cup. Hope they prove me wrong.  Guess we shall see.  

[The Dude]

1 hour ago, delneggs said:

No where near a ledge.  They are a very good team.  The point I am making is they don't have what it takes to be successful come playoffs or win a cup.  Not enough grit/jam/nastiness/whatever.  COULD they be those things?  Of coarse, anyone can, but you have to want to, and I have seen enough of this core to know, they don't want it that bad and are not willing to get dirty to win a cup. Hope they prove me wrong.  Guess we shall see.  

But you gauge them against the Canes for comparison as a team of soldiers who have the attributes you desire... . A team the Rangers beat and gave fits when they faced them in the playoffs. 

 

I think you're selling a lot of these players short. They may not be the meanest or or the most gritty. But this coach can get these guys to play a brand of hockey that will survive in the playoffs.  These "built for the playoffs " teams, haven't exactly been edging everyone out and winning cups. It's more skill that is winning over the grit. 

 

We'll just have to wait and see. 

 

 

[delneggs]

8 minutes ago, The Dude said:

But you gauge them against the Canes for comparison as a team of soldiers who have the attributes you desire... . A team the Rangers beat and gave fits when they faced them in the playoffs. 

 

I think you're selling a lot of these players short. They may not be the meanest or or the most gritty. But this coach can get these guys to play a brand of hockey that will survive in the playoffs.  These "built for the playoffs " teams, haven't exactly been edging everyone out and winning cups. It's more skill that is winning over the grit. 

 

We'll just have to wait and see. 

 

 

Agree, we will have to wait and see.  

[BrooksBurner]

 

 

[Br4d]

Rangers Cup hopes this year might well ride on Alexis Lafreniere's second half.  That and Kakko and Chytil coming back strong at some point.

 

The vets aren't going to get it done.

[Pete]

[jsm7302]

They have hit the inevitable slump as expected with every 82 game journey to the tournament in the Spring. This team is just as good as any other and they have holes just like any other team. There will be some roster movement coming shortly and we can expect some growing pains to continue...HOWEVER.....the ship will be righted and I expect the post season to be just as exciting as the start of the season. 

[Valriera]

Article says team defense sucks.

 

lafreniere is the savior. Lol.

 

its simple and has been simple: success in the beginning of the year is about limiting chances from the slot. We’re not doing it. The team wins when they do that.

 

Last night there were three goals from the slot. I won’t count Peterson’s circus of a goal. Same story with every loss. Limit the chances in the slot and win. Don’t and lose.

Edited January 9 by Valriera

[Sharpshooter]

Continue to love what I'm seeing from Laf at least. That may have been one of his best games ever. It's up there. The dude has been flying the last week or two especially. 25 points in 39 games played so far. I'm really hoping he can get to 65 or somewhere around there. That would be a really good improvement from last season's 39, and he's passing the eye test more and more. It hasn't just been Panarin.

Edited January 9 by Sharpshooter

[RangersIn7]

They can clean up the defensive issues and lapses. I have full confidence they can and will, as we’ve seen them play good defensive hockey this season.

 

It’s I think also a byproduct of them missing 2 top-9 forwards, playing a couple of minor league players and playing a couple of players up in the lineup where they really shouldn’t be playing. 

[Ozzy]

1 hour ago, RangersIn7 said:

They can clean up the defensive issues and lapses. I have full confidence they can and will, as we’ve seen them play good defensive hockey this season.

 

It’s I think also a byproduct of them missing 2 top-9 forwards, playing a couple of minor league players and playing a couple of players up in the lineup where they really shouldn’t be playing. 

 

This is where I'm at too, 7

 

It looks like we've just gotten away from our defensive structure we had at the beginning of the season.  Possibly due to the influx of injury substitutes.  I'm pretty confident we'll get back to who we were.  Right now it kinda feels like we're in "weather the storm" mode.

Edited January 9 by Ozzy

[Sod16]

The Rangers are 8-7-1 in the fake standings in their last 16; 6-7-3 by the real measure (regulation record).  I shutter to think what their overall goal differential and 5v5 differential have been over those 16 games.   In the old days, there would be a trade to shake up such a team, but in the cap/no trade world, the only significant in-season trades are deadline deals, and those involve a limited universe of players based on their contract status.

[Pete]

35 minutes ago, Sod16 said:

The Rangers are 8-7-1 in the fake standings in their last 16; 6-7-3 by the real measure (regulation record).  I shutter to think what their overall goal differential and 5v5 differential have been over those 16 games.   In the old days, there would be a trade to shake up such a team, but in the cap/no trade world, the only significant in-season trades are deadline deals, and those involve a limited universe of players based on their contract status.

-10 goal diff at 5v5

[Albatrosss]

Panarin is carrying the team.  Once he cools down, this team will go on a losing streak most likely.  

 

and i dont understand why Sam and Michaletti keep insulting Panarin by calling the Zib line the top line.  

[BrooksBurner]

5v5 point production w/ NHL rank amongst forwards

 

Panarin 28, #7

Trocheck 23, #28

Lafreniere 20, #57

Kreider 16, #104

Zibanejad 13, #164

Wheeler 13, #164

Vesey 12, #186

Cuylle 10, #237

 

Yes, depth is a problem right now for 5v5, but the bigger problem is having a "1C" who is profiling more like a 3C at 5v5. Tied with Wheeler at 5v5. Blake fucking Wheeler. Limiting the rankings to just centers, Zib is rank #86, tied with rock stars such as Mikael Granlund, Alex Wennberg, Ryan McLeod, Jack Drury, Wyatt Johnston, and Matthew Poitras.

[Valriera]

4 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

5v5 point production w/ NHL rank amongst forwards

 

Panarin 28, #7

Trocheck 23, #28

Lafreniere 20, #57

Kreider 16, #104

Zibanejad 13, #164

Wheeler 13, #164

Vesey 12, #186

Cuylle 10, #237

 

Yes, depth is a problem right now for 5v5, but the bigger problem is having a "1C" who is profiling more like a 3C at 5v5. Tied with Wheeler at 5v5. Blake fucking Wheeler. Limiting the rankings to just centers, Zib is rank #86, tied with rock stars such as Mikael Granlund, Alex Wennberg, Ryan McLeod, Jack Drury, Wyatt Johnston, and Matthew Poitras.

Yes this is fair and when we were winning everything to start the year splitting Mika and kreider was the best thought on how to address this. I think it still is but depth issues have popped up the totem pole of concerns. Once that gets sorted out I imagine it’s back to Mika’s poor production 5v5

[Br4d]

9 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

5v5 point production w/ NHL rank amongst forwards

 

Panarin 28, #7

Trocheck 23, #28

Lafreniere 20, #57

Kreider 16, #104

Zibanejad 13, #164

Wheeler 13, #164

Vesey 12, #186

Cuylle 10, #237

 

Yes, depth is a problem right now for 5v5, but the bigger problem is having a "1C" who is profiling more like a 3C at 5v5. Tied with Wheeler at 5v5. Blake fucking Wheeler. Limiting the rankings to just centers, Zib is rank #86, tied with rock stars such as Mikael Granlund, Alex Wennberg, Ryan McLeod, Jack Drury, Wyatt Johnston, and Matthew Poitras.

 

This was a problem last year but only against teams that made the playoffs.  Zib feasted on the teams that did not.

[Sod16]

Zib with one more 5v5 point than Vesey, with far more ice time, in nearly half a season.  Let's face it, this is a player in decline, and it's a problem that probably isn't going to work itself out.

[Br4d]

7 hours ago, Sod16 said:

Zib with one more 5v5 point than Vesey, with far more ice time, in nearly half a season.  Let's face it, this is a player in decline, and it's a problem that probably isn't going to work itself out.

 

Zib will fit really well as 3C in a checking defensive line in a couple of years.  The interval needs to be managed.

 

I'd try him with Cuylle at LW and Kakko at RW after Kakko is back and skating well.

Edited January 14 by Br4d