The Sky Is Kinda Falling

[fletch]

54 minutes ago, Pete said:

The first quarter of the season disagrees with you. 

October Rangers don't exist any more, just as April Rangers don't exist yet.  Situations are dynamic and change, and we don't know how well the Rangers will be playing in April and what their position will be in the standings.

 

A man can be a good husband for a woman for 20 years.  When she finds out that he had a threesome with her sister and best friend, she makes decisions in the present on what she wants her future to look like.  Does the 20 good years get considered, and is he the same person he's been all along?  There isn't a single right answer for the woman in that situation, and different women would do different things.

 

After the playoffs are over we'll have our first data point on the Laviolette Rangers.  Until then, we're dealing with incomplete information.

[BrooksBurner]

2 minutes ago, fletch said:

October Rangers don't exist any more, just as April Rangers don't exist yet.  Situations are dynamic and change, and we don't know how well the Rangers will be playing in April and what their position will be in the standings.

 

A man can be a good husband for a woman for 20 years.  When she finds out that he had a threesome with her sister and best friend, she makes decisions in the present on what she wants her future to look like.  Does the 20 good years get considered, and is he the same person he's been all along?  There isn't a single right answer for the woman in that situation, and different women would do different things.

 

After the playoffs are over we'll have our first data point on the Laviolette Rangers.  Until then, we're dealing with incomplete information.

Geezus fletch, got some skeletons in your closet pal?

[Phil]

2 hours ago, Br4d said:

 

Kakko has value as a 3rd liner.  If we can get more than that for him he should be moved.  Miller is valuable enough to bring us a young RW who might be a 1RW or a young C who can play 3C this season while potentially moving up the lineup in the scramble at the end of the season if we get blown out of the playoffs again.

 

And, yes, we're lucky to have Laviolette at this point.  Nobody is going to accuse the coaching staff of being the problem if this all goes south.

 

Removing Miller, bad as he's been, and back filling with a cold (and tiny) Zac Jones, even if you get a good RW out of the deal, completely imbalances the roster. I'd play with changing the entire defense structure first, but if they're committed to moving Miller, I'd be looking at Minnesota, maybe. Wild are bottoming out and they're gonna need to do something.

 

To MIN:

Miller ($3.872x1)

Kakko ($2.1 x RFA)

 

To NYR:

Jake Middleton (LD, $2.45x1)

Ryan Hartman (C/RW, $1.7, then $4x3)

Brandon Duhaime (RW/LW, $1.1 x UFA)

 

Something like this? All straight-line players. Should be right up the coaching staff's alley. Waive whatever extra F you want to make room for Duhaime. Pitlick, Brodzinski, Bonino, whoever. They're all the same interchangeable junk anyway. Miller is a Minnesota kid, so he's the centerpiece of the deal for them. Kakko is a prototypical Wild player. Big, plays 200 feet, accomplishes nothing.

 

Rangers can then worry about what the hell is happening with Chytil in the off-season because you'll have two third-line centers making $4 million. Call me crazy, but I'll happily keep the one who isn't a hit away from forced retirement.

[BrooksBurner]

27 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

Removing Miller, bad as he's been, and back filling with a cold (and tiny) Zac Jones, even if you get a good RW out of the deal, completely imbalances the roster. I'd play with changing the entire defense structure first, but if they're committed to moving Miller, I'd be looking at Minnesota, maybe. Wild are bottoming out and they're gonna need to do something.

 

To MIN:

Miller ($3.872x1)

Kakko ($2.1 x RFA)

 

To NYR:

Jake Middleton (LD, $2.45x1)

Ryan Hartman (C/RW, $1.7, then $4x3)

Brandon Duhaime (RW/LW, $1.1 x UFA)

 

Something like this? All straight-line players. Should be right up the coaching staff's alley. Waive whatever extra F you want to make room for Duhaime. Pitlick, Brodzinski, Bonino, whoever. They're all the same interchangeable junk anyway. Miller is a Minnesota kid, so he's the centerpiece of the deal for them. Kakko is a prototypical Wild player. Big, plays 200 feet, accomplishes nothing.

 

Rangers can then worry about what the hell is happening with Chytil in the off-season because you'll have two third-line centers making $4 million. Call me crazy, but I'll happily keep the one who isn't a hit away from forced retirement.

Ek instead of Hartman and I do it.

 

Just put Chytil to wing, or trade him if he doesn’t wanna. 

Edited January 21 by BrooksBurner

[Sharpshooter]

They're getting absolutely nothing from their bottom six. They're basically a one line team and all of their good offensive players are just too up and down where the ups are really good, but the downs are really down. You factor in shoddy defense and goaltending, and you're going to have major inconsistencies.

[Br4d]

I don't really want any of the players you have coming back from Minny in that deal.  They're either journeymen or have seen their best days or both.

 

If we're letting go of Miller I want to get somebody back that we can at least double-vision into a topline C or RW for a bunch of years.  They don't have to be there yet but the potential for that has to be there and they have to slot well in at 3C or 1RW this year.

[Pete]

1 hour ago, fletch said:

October Rangers don't exist any more, just as April Rangers don't exist yet.  Situations are dynamic and change, and we don't know how well the Rangers will be playing in April and what their position will be in the standings.

 

A man can be a good husband for a woman for 20 years.  When she finds out that he had a threesome with her sister and best friend, she makes decisions in the present on what she wants her future to look like.  Does the 20 good years get considered, and is he the same person he's been all along?  There isn't a single right answer for the woman in that situation, and different women would do different things.

 

After the playoffs are over we'll have our first data point on the Laviolette Rangers.  Until then, we're dealing with incomplete information.

I completely disagree with the analogy, but I get what you're saying. There's no betrayal of trust here.

 

The question is can the team play a certain kind of way, and the answer is yes. We saw it. They got away from it.

 

The second question is can we get back to it? 

[Albatrosss]

10 minutes ago, Pete said:

I completely disagree with the analogy, but I get what you're saying. There's no betrayal of trust here.

 

The question is can the team play a certain kind of way, and the answer is yes. We saw it. They got away from it.

 

The second question is can we get back to it? 

What certain way? PP and Panarin carrying the offense?  That was the only way and now Panarin cooled down and PP isnt as effective.  There’s no master system

[Pete]

7 minutes ago, Albatrosss said:

What certain way? PP and Panarin carrying the offense?  That was the only way and now Panarin cooled down and PP isnt as effective.  There’s no master system

I disagree. They were playing great defensive hockey. I'm not talking about the offense. That was bound to come around no matter what, but defensively they are incohesive right now. 

[BrooksBurner]

7 minutes ago, Albatrosss said:

What certain way? PP and Panarin carrying the offense?  That was the only way and now Panarin cooled down and PP isnt as effective.  There’s no master system

They also lucked out with some hot goaltending in 1 goal games, and that was the “evidence” of an “improved defensive structure”.

 

Gallant might not have been strong at Xs and Os, but you damn well know as a qualified NHL coach he had a way he wanted the team to play. They didn’t play that way. It’s the same with Lavi. He wants them to play a certain way and we haven’t seen one bit of it yet.

[Art20c]

Sky is not falling yet, but will be soon if nothing is done about changing this soft style of play they lately adopted. Nothing passes visual test, not offence nor defence. Peripheral offence with east west passes and no one going to the net, constant hesitance to shoot from bad angles, and infinite chase for that one perfect play which comes very seldom. Same with power play. It just boggles my mind how on earth it could be rated at no 2 in the whole league?! Defence is as soft as baby’s ass. Always somebody is behind last d and goal. Can’t clear bodies in the front of the net. And again d is looking for that perfect outlet pass. Other teams already figured all this shit out that’s why 6 is lost out of last 8. And those 6 were not an elite teams, they were either bottom feeders or teams with some serious problems being it health related or just a regular slump. Doesn’t matter, we lost hopelessly, and in most cases making opponent’s no-name goalies look like Dryden in his prime. 

Edited January 21 by Art20c

[Albatrosss]

11 minutes ago, Pete said:

I disagree. They were playing great defensive hockey. I'm not talking about the offense. That was bound to come around no matter what, but defensively they are incohesive right now. 

I think they were lucky on defense, I didn’t see any kind of shut down hockey. Same running around in the D zone but now they’re being scored on. 

[Albatrosss]

12 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

They also lucked out with some hot goaltending in 1 goal games, and that was the “evidence” of an “improved defensive structure”.

 

Gallant might not have been strong at Xs and Os, but you damn well know as a qualified NHL coach he had a way he wanted the team to play. They didn’t play that way. It’s the same with Lavi. He wants them to play a certain way and we haven’t seen one bit of it yet.

Im not even sure how Lavi wants them to play. If it’s defensive hockey, i havent seen it yet. 

[BrooksBurner]

2 minutes ago, Albatrosss said:

Im not even sure how Lavi wants them to play. If it’s defensive hockey, i havent seen it yet. 

I’ve seen the 1-3-1 in effect. You’ll see it most recently on LAK’s 2nd goal the other night. Miller, Trouba, and Kakko all sucking at it at the same time.

[Pete]

6 minutes ago, Albatrosss said:

I think they were lucky on defense, I didn’t see any kind of shut down hockey. Same running around in the D zone but now they’re being scored on. 

Disagree.

[Keirik]

This team has been all Jekyll and Hyde all season. This really isn't anything new. It's just gotten more obvious now because teams are scouting us better as the season goes on.

 

  As others have said, its a team of coach killers at times. Even if a Panarin, Trocheck, and Laf have bought in, it's clear that others haven't or are dying on that hill of how they want to play. 

  If we go back to the first two months of the season (21 games), the Rangers have given up 3 or more goals 10 out of 21 games. It's not as if its been some defensive stalwart of a team just recently going through a funk. In that 21 game stretch, they've given up 5 goals 3 times, 4 goals twice, 6 goals once,  and 7 goals once. Also,before we start saying this is all Igor, Quick was in goal on 4 difference times where we gave up 3 or more of those 10 occurrences. 

 

Its a yo-yo season. Hopefully the upswing comes again by playoff time. 

[Br4d]

18 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

They also lucked out with some hot goaltending in 1 goal games, and that was the “evidence” of an “improved defensive structure”.

 

Gallant might not have been strong at Xs and Os, but you damn well know as a qualified NHL coach he had a way he wanted the team to play. They didn’t play that way. It’s the same with Lavi. He wants them to play a certain way and we haven’t seen one bit of it yet.

 

We saw it early on.  The Rangers played a 1-3-1 very well and the forechecking in the OZ was disciplined.  The backchecking and defense around the goal and in the slot was good.

 

However the team was thin with a lot of roster spots taken up by vet minimum salaries attached to 75% effective players.  When the injuries started they knocked the team off of the plan.  When Fox returned a lot of the Ranger's bad habits of years past did also.  We saw a lot more east-west and a lot less discipline, relying on the goalies to carry the load.

 

Right now we're in trouble because the team apparently cannot get back to the disciplined hockey they were playing earlier in the season.  This is partly because we're missing pieces still but it is mostly because it takes real mental effort to adapt to a new system and run it well.  With the 75% effective crew still on full display that puts a lot of pressure on the NMC vets and the young guys to fill the gaps and they're not up to it at this point.

[fletch]

8 hours ago, Br4d said:

Coach-killers.

 

Not sure what to do about it though.

 

4 hours ago, fletch said:

Worst case scenario is you've got a core group of veterans with no move clauses that don't particularly care about regular season hockey.  This core group has never had accountability because when they complain to the organization about the coach, the organization listens and blames/fires the coach.  There are not healthy scratches.  Over the years, there has been constant placation, so you've got an entitled group of spoiled brats that don't have to work particular hard or face any consequences.  The rotten locker room theory, which only gets fixed when you get rid of at least one of the bad apples, and the locker room culture changes.

 

Best case scenario is that this is just a routine bad stretch of games that every team goes through. There is plenty of time to start playing good hockey, the team gels, and goes on a deep playoff run.

 

The truth is probably somewhere between the worst case scenario and best case scenario.

 

I'd suggest that our core group of veterans at their peak were good, but not good enough to win a Cup.   

 

I'd suggest what we have now is past-peak veterans with no move clauses that can't elevate their game in the playoffs to the same level they did a few years ago - call it fire, intensity, will, whatever.  We're hoping the young guns can elevate their production and the veterans can provide the leadership to provide a deep playoff run.

 

I'm not surprised that we are seeing mid-season lulls where players don't want to put in the work in the Laviolette system to play sound hockey and get wins.

 

And when the Rangers win the Cup I'll be glad to admit I was wrong.

[Sod16]

Miller and Kakko two of the few moveable objects.  Kakko of little value at the moment.  Miller still probably thought of highly in many precints around the league.  As has been said.  Sell high; sell now.

[Br4d]

2 hours ago, fletch said:

 

 

I'd suggest that our core group of veterans at their peak were good, but not good enough to win a Cup.   

 

I'd suggest what we have now is past-peak veterans with no move clauses that can't elevate their game in the playoffs to the same level they did a few years ago - call it fire, intensity, will, whatever.  We're hoping the young guns can elevate their production and the veterans can provide the leadership to provide a deep playoff run.

 

I'm not surprised that we are seeing mid-season lulls where players don't want to put in the work in the Laviolette system to play sound hockey and get wins.

 

And when the Rangers win the Cup I'll be glad to admit I was wrong.

 

It's the sloppiness in play that is really getting me right now.  The Rangers have basically been escorting the opponents to the goal mouth too often and asking them "is this the shot you want?  Need a better angle?". 

 

This was definitely not happening for most of the first 25-odd games.

 

We had defensemen selling out at the side of the net during that stretch and going prone to take away the low shots if necessary.

 

We had crisp outlets to the sides not these ridiculous cross ice passes in our own zone in traffic.

 

Something bad has happened to the defense as a whole the last 20 games and we need to figure that out because we're not a good team largely due to that effect.

 

This is *not* an Igor issue.  He's not having his best year but when he's in a slump he's still a lot better than the average goalie.

Edited January 21 by Br4d

[Pete]

1 minute ago, Br4d said:

He's not having his best year but when he's in a slump he's still a lot better than the average goalie.

Well, the numbers say he isn't. You also have to remember that the defense is used to playing a certain way in front of Igor. They know when he "has this one"... And now he doesn't.

 

Regardless of the way the defense is playing in front of him, he's letting it a lot of savable goals. And he still has the worst save percentage in the league when down by 2. The entire team unravels now, including the goalie. 

[Phil]

7 hours ago, BrooksBurner said:

Ek instead of Hartman and I do it.

 

Just put Chytil to wing, or trade him if he doesn’t wanna. 

 

Yeah, but the Wild probably don't.

[Vodka Drunkenski]

Take the kinda out of the title

[Phil]

2 hours ago, Pete said:

Well, the numbers say he isn't. You also have to remember that the defense is used to playing a certain way in front of Igor. They know when he "has this one"... And now he doesn't.

 

Regardless of the way the defense is playing in front of him, he's letting it a lot of savable goals. And he still has the worst save percentage in the league when down by 2. The entire team unravels now, including the goalie. 

 

You could argue they unravel because of him. One bad goal and the air lets out because it sends a strong signal through the whole team that Igor's not a god anymore.

[The Dude]

8 hours ago, BrooksBurner said:

Perhaps the greater point though, is that the lines and pairings shouldn’t be a significant factor if everyone knows what they’re doing. For example, Carolina can plug and play bodies and get by.

I wish people would stop using Carolina as some kind of stencil for how a team should play or be built.

 

They've won nothing.  The Rangers kinda own them. I'd think BrindAmour is on the hot seat if they don't make it to the Conference finals.  I doubt they make it.  

 

Not many other teams have this Swiss army knife, interchangeable parts theory. Let's not act like the Rangers are behind the times.