Inmates Seem to Be Running the Asylum

[delneggs]

I am the newbie here but am interested in other people opinions about something.  I have been a die hard Ranger fan since the Eddie Giocomin days so I have a long history with this team, like many of you I'm sure.  My frustration with the team has been building since Torts left and it seems to me that it does not matter who the coaches are or what their philosophy is, this core of players starting with Kreider are simply going to play however they want to play and when things don't work out over time they know it's the GM and/or coach that is going to pay the price.  If you look at every coach since Torts, they have ALL said that they need to be more north/south and less east/west, but that NEVER changes.  They ALL have said they need to be more physical and go to the hard area and drive the net to get sloppy goals, but they never do with any regularity.  The vast majority of their time in the O zone is skating and passing around the perimeter until they try the inevitable cross ice pass through 3 or 4 defenders. They have ALL said they need to shoot more and stop over passing, but that never changes.  It almost seems like most of the forwards and some D would rather get an assist on a blind, behind the back pass, than score a goal, and that blows my mind. There are other things but I don't want to rant too much. 

 

So, am I crazy or are the inmates running this asylum?   

[Phil]

You're not crazy. Three coaches in five years. One common denominator: same core. It's like you said — they're going to play how they want to play and if that's not available to them, you get pretty miserable results. They appeared to buy in on Laviolette early on but the foot has definitely let off the petal since November. They're just not built for what the coaches want to see. Too many of their critical pieces simply refuse to do what's required to pull that off.

[Pete]

The problem is you can't just trade 50 goal scorers and 90 point players, no matter how much we talk about it on the board. It's unrealistic, and it's probably not going to happen unless this team misses the playoffs, which will be really hard to do considering the points they banked already. 

 

It's now up to Laviolette to communicate and change patterns. If you have two guys who insist on passing to each other instead of shooting, it might be time to split those two guys.

 

If you have a defenseman who's reluctant to shoot on the power play, it might be time to take that guy off the power play. 

 

At the same time, that's also unlikely to happen as they are trying to win games.

 

Frankly this doesn't fall to the coaching staff in a vacuum, the leadership on this team needs to speak up. Not throw gear, but maybe actually have someone on one conversations that revolve around shooting the puck. 

 

They are capable of playing an effective defensive game. What they're not capable of doing is establishing some more offense while maintaining high defensive metrics. 

[Phil]

I think the only thing they can really do at this point is to mix the lines in a way that puts drag-you-into-the-fight players with the top-six skilled guys who won't do it themselves. Panarin has Trocheck (and sometimes Laf). Kreider and Zibanejad have no one. I want Cuylle there long-term, probably, but he's a rookie. If they can find someone who can be that first man in, get him. Like what Sammy Blais was supposed to be. Like what Hagelin was to Richards and Gaborik, or Avery was for Jagr.

[Pete]

6 minutes ago, Phil said:

I think the only thing they can really do at this point is to mix the lines in a way that puts drag-you-into-the-fight players with the top-six skilled guys who won't do it themselves. Panarin has Trocheck (and sometimes Laf). Kreider and Zibanejad have no one. I want Cuylle there long-term, probably, but he's a rookie. If they can find someone who can be that first man in, get him. Like what Sammy Blais was supposed to be. Like what Hagelin was to Richards and Gaborik, or Avery was for Jagr.

Cullye Zib Kakko

Bread Tro Lafreniere

Kreider Brodz Vesey 

Pitlick Goody Wheeler

Edited January 24 by Pete

[siddious]

2 minutes ago, Pete said:

Cullye Zib Kakko

Bread Tro Lafreniere

Kreider Brodz Vesey 

Pitlick Goody Wheeler

Kreider ain’t scoring 5on 5 anyway. It’s about time he sees some 3rd line action 

[Phil]

1 minute ago, Pete said:

Cullye Zib Kakko

Bread Tro Lafreniere

Kreider Brodz Vesey 

Pitlick Goody Wheeler

 

This works for now. There's zero margin for error, though, and it does nothing for me in the playoffs. The idea of going into the first round with Brodzinski as my third-line center is just ... woof.

 

But it's the right idea. Every line has a first man in. Cuylle, Tro or Laf, Vesey. Fourth line is just extra junk who you hope doesn't hurt you cause it's slow as molasses.

[Pete]

19 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

This works for now. There's zero margin for error, though, and it does nothing for me in the playoffs. The idea of going into the first round with Brodzinski as my third-line center is just ... woof.

 

But it's the right idea. Every line has a first man in. Cuylle, Tro or Laf, Vesey. Fourth line is just extra junk who you hope doesn't hurt you cause it's slow as molasses.

This will not be the playoff roster. Either FC will be back, or there will be a trade. 

[delneggs]

41 minutes ago, Pete said:

The problem is you can't just trade 50 goal scorers and 90 point players, no matter how much we talk about it on the board. It's unrealistic, and it's probably not going to happen unless this team misses the playoffs, which will be really hard to do considering the points they banked already. 

 

It's now up to Laviolette to communicate and change patterns. If you have two guys who insist on passing to each other instead of shooting, it might be time to split those two guys.

 

If you have a defenseman who's reluctant to shoot on the power play, it might be time to take that guy off the power play. 

 

At the same time, that's also unlikely to happen as they are trying to win games.

 

Frankly this doesn't fall to the coaching staff in a vacuum, the leadership on this team needs to speak up. Not throw gear, but maybe actually have someone on one conversations that revolve around shooting the puck. 

 

They are capable of playing an effective defensive game. What they're not capable of doing is establishing some more offense while maintaining high defensive metrics. 

What about one trade for a player that has shown to go to the net and the dirty areas with gusto, like Gourde?  If we could pry him out of Seattle as our 3C I think that would help and would be fine with swapping him for Chytil.  A 3rd line of Kreider/Gourde/Kakko? 

[Phil]

Works on paper, but falls down in reality because of the cap and Chytil's career-threatening head injuries. Seattle isn't just saying yes to that one-for-one.

[delneggs]

22 minutes ago, Phil said:

Works on paper, but falls down in reality because of the cap and Chytil's career-threatening head injuries. Seattle isn't just saying yes to that one-for-one.

Doesn't have to be one for one.  Let's face it, Chytil is talented but soft as tissue paper and injury prone, and not just to concussions.  It's too bad but it's true, so if we could move him and get Gourde somehow, I'm all for it.  

[Phil]

2 minutes ago, delneggs said:

Doesn't have to be one for one.  Let's face it, Chytil is talented but soft as tissue paper and injury prone, and not just to concussions.  It's too bad but it's true, so if we could move him and get Gourde somehow, I'm all for it.  

 

I agree, but that's also why his trade value is going to be really low.

[delneggs]

24 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

I agree, but that's also why his trade value is going to be really low.

So be it then.  When is his trade value going to be high?  After his next concussion?  They should get his replacement IMO as soon as possible.  

[Bugg]

14 hours ago, Phil said:

Works on paper, but falls down in reality because of the cap and Chytil's career-threatening head injuries. Seattle isn't just saying yes to that one-for-one.

Brooks has touched on how making trades is not like it used to be (where have you gone, Phil Esposito?) because of 2 reasons. Losers' points means nobody is really our of it. Every owner and fan base can point to the Blues going from last place on New Year's to lifting  the Cup , even if under weird circumstances. And the flat cap means many teams are up against it like the Rangers are too. Difficult to make swaps that work when nobody has much room under the cap. Figure we'll still see some small market teams dump salary at the deadline but it still isn't easy.

[Pete]

31 minutes ago, Bugg said:

Brooks has touched on how making trades is not like it used to be (where have you gone, Phil Esposito?) because of 2 reasons. Losers' points means nobody is really our of it. Every owner and fan base can point to the Blues going from last place on New Year's to lifting  the Cup , even if under weird circumstances. And the flat cap means many teams are up against it like the Rangers are too. Difficult to make swaps that work when nobody has much room under the cap. Figure we'll still see some small market teams dump salary at the deadline but it still isn't easy.

Like I said earlier, Elliot Friedman always says teams can trade their problems or fix their problems and they prefer to fix their problems.

 

It's almost impossible to make a trade these days, and even more difficult in season. Then secondly, more than ever there are discussions about how successful the player who got traded away is doing, and no GM wants to be burned.

[JHS]

16 hours ago, delneggs said:

I am the newbie here but am interested in other people opinions about something.  I have been a die hard Ranger fan since the Eddie Giocomin days so I have a long history with this team, like many of you I'm sure.  My frustration with the team has been building since Torts left and it seems to me that it does not matter who the coaches are or what their philosophy is, this core of players starting with Kreider are simply going to play however they want to play and when things don't work out over time they know it's the GM and/or coach that is going to pay the price.  If you look at every coach since Torts, they have ALL said that they need to be more north/south and less east/west, but that NEVER changes.  They ALL have said they need to be more physical and go to the hard area and drive the net to get sloppy goals, but they never do with any regularity.  The vast majority of their time in the O zone is skating and passing around the perimeter until they try the inevitable cross ice pass through 3 or 4 defenders. They have ALL said they need to shoot more and stop over passing, but that never changes.  It almost seems like most of the forwards and some D would rather get an assist on a blind, behind the back pass, than score a goal, and that blows my mind. There are other things but I don't want to rant too much. 

 

So, am I crazy or are the inmates running this asylum?   

Yup this is exactly on point.  The team has shown very little tendency to do the little things, commit to playing a full 60 minutes and defend first.  The biggest culprit is Kreider.  The guy coasts around the ice constantly, won’t hit anything, plays as soft as a wet tissue…just really sets the country club tone that seems to be sliding into the team more and more each day!

[Sharpshooter]

We're at the point where someone needs to throw a helmet.

 

But seriously, you are spot on. I don't think the team's early success was a tease or a fluke. They showed you what they are capable of when they are committed and they have a system. This is their third coach in five years, but really, the only good one this core group has had. They bought in early and were playing great. Then bad habits crept back in and they got lethargic and lazy and took their foot off pedal. Think of how the Rangers play with a two or three goal lead, except it's a stretch of hockey that's lasted over 20 games now. Now they seem to be more selective of when they put the foot on the gas, and when they take it off.

 

It's gotten so bad that they've put cruise control going about 40mph. My copium is that they're conserving energy for the latter stretch of the season and the playoffs. Another reason is they are just lacking depth and it's starting to show. They are basically a one line team at best. Their third and fourth line are bad at generating anything. It's all players that are washed and/or shouldn't be in the league at all. Drury did what he could addressing the depth in the offseason with very limited cap space, and we're seeing that now. It hasn't worked out. Also, they weren't envisioning losing Kakko for 20 games and Cytil for the year. Chytil being gone was a huge blow, as he looked poise to have a really nice season. Drury really needs to make a move or two in the next couple of weeks. While I think this roster has been in a funk, injured and sick, they are also lacking in key areas that need to be addressed much sooner than later.

[The Dude]

I think the newly constructed 3rd line can be helpful. Obviously it would be better with a different center,  but is seems Brodzinski has won over Laviolette for now. 

 

Cuylle and Wheeler bring a different look from the flash of the Panarin line and the....... what ever you want to call that garbage the Zibanejad line is now. As long as they continue to get the puck deep,  control it and crowd the front of the net, it should generate chances and draw a little heat away from the Panarin line. So far that line is playing north. 

 

With them out there, I think we see an uptick in the D men shooting more, in hopes of deflections or slop/bad goals.

 

I'm a fan of scoring chances.  Im.a fan of net front presence.  I'm a fan of cuts straight to the net. If they can atleast do these things, it's beneficial. Scoring is an added bonus.  

[Pete]

51 minutes ago, Sharpshooter said:

It's gotten so bad that they've put cruise control going about 40mph. My copium is that they're conserving energy for the latter stretch of the season and the playoffs. Another reason is they are just lacking depth and it's starting to show. They are basically a one line team at best. Their third and fourth line are bad at generating anything. It's all players that are washed and/or shouldn't be in the league at all. Drury did what he could addressing the depth in the offseason with very limited cap space, and we're seeing that now. It hasn't worked out. Also, they weren't envisioning losing Kakko for 20 games and Cytil for the year. Chytil being gone was a huge blow, as he looked poise to have a really nice season. Drury really needs to make a move or two in the next couple of weeks. While I think this roster has been in a funk, injured and sick, they are also lacking in key areas that need to be addressed much sooner than later.

You're hitting the nail on the head. There are too many guys who aren't supposed to be getting minutes, who are getting minutes (Wheeler, Bonino, Pitlick).

 

Trocheck is averaging 21 minutes as a forward and Bread Not far behind. You would normally want them in the 18 to 19 minute range, and now it's starting to add up, every forward is playing about 2 minutes more than they should. Bonino and Wheeler should not be playing 13 minutes a game.

[Phil]

3 hours ago, Bugg said:

Brooks has touched on how making trades is not like it used to be (where have you gone, Phil Esposito?) because of 2 reasons. Losers' points means nobody is really our of it. Every owner and fan base can point to the Blues going from last place on New Year's to lifting  the Cup , even if under weird circumstances. And the flat cap means many teams are up against it like the Rangers are too. Difficult to make swaps that work when nobody has much room under the cap. Figure we'll still see some small market teams dump salary at the deadline but it still isn't easy.

 

3 hours ago, Pete said:

Like I said earlier, Elliot Friedman always says teams can trade their problems or fix their problems and they prefer to fix their problems.

 

It's almost impossible to make a trade these days, and even more difficult in season. Then secondly, more than ever there are discussions about how successful the player who got traded away is doing, and no GM wants to be burned.

 

The Friedman line, to me, is bullshit. The reason teams don't make trades is because the league has a hard-as-can-be salary cap that's run alongside inflating salaries so much to the point that nearly every "good" team in the league pays big, big money to their stars and then relies on ELC and league minimum deals to fill out their roster. That model is designed to not allow for trades unless it's essentially money in, money out.

 

There is no middle class in the NHL anymore.

[BrooksBurner]

28 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

 

The Friedman line, to me, is bullshit. The reason teams don't make trades is because the league has a hard-as-can-be salary cap that's run alongside inflating salaries so much to the point that nearly every "good" team in the league pays big, big money to their stars and then relies on ELC and league minimum deals to fill out their roster. That model is designed to not allow for trades unless it's essentially money in, money out.

Even teams with shit attendance are spending up to the cap limit.

[Pete]

1 hour ago, Phil said:

 

 

The Friedman line, to me, is bullshit. The reason teams don't make trades is because the league has a hard-as-can-be salary cap that's run alongside inflating salaries so much to the point that nearly every "good" team in the league pays big, big money to their stars and then relies on ELC and league minimum deals to fill out their roster. That model is designed to not allow for trades unless it's essentially money in, money out.

 

There is no middle class in the NHL anymore.

How's it bullshit then? It's easier to try and fix your problems than trade your problems for all the reasons you're outlining, and no different than what I just said.

[Phil]

I guess maybe not bullshit, but it feels like it's trying to provide more of an explanation than is necessary. The reason no one trades is because no one can trade except for at very specific points in the year (draft/off-season and trade deadline). There's no need to philosophize it with "trade your problems/fix your problems" because it's creating the sense that there's a choice in the matter. There almost never is.

 

Example: The Flames can trade Huberdeau or fix Huberdeau. Sure, on paper. In reality? They can't trade him. It's functionally impossible. They have no choice but to "fix" him.

[Pete]

22 minutes ago, Phil said:

I guess maybe not bullshit, but it feels like it's trying to provide more of an explanation than is necessary. The reason no one trades is because no one can trade except for at very specific points in the year (draft/off-season and trade deadline). There's no need to philosophize it with "trade your problems/fix your problems" because it's creating the sense that there's a choice in the matter. There almost never is.

 

Example: The Flames can trade Huberdeau or fix Huberdeau. Sure, on paper. In reality? They can't trade him. It's functionally impossible. They have no choice but to "fix" him.

I mean there are avenues to get rid of him. I think when he says "trade" he also includes buyout.

 

You can trade with a hight pick and retention and have the buyer hope it's just a bat fit in Calgary. But you're also looking at the most dire candidate. Do it again with Panarin.

 

Let's just say Panarin busts in the playoffs, and management wants to move on. That trade is going to require he provide a list of teams. He's not going to want to play on a losing team, or in say Winnipeg. So playoff teams only, for a playoff "non performer". You're going to need to retain...and let's be generous and say they retain 25% (even though we all know—it's gonna be 50%), that's about $3M dead cap and then you have to pay the players you're getting back because it's not going to be a 1:1...So how much cap are you saving? What's the point? On the other side, which competitive team could take him at $8M and not wreck their cap?

 

Look at Lafreniere, they could have traded him but they hitched him to Panarin instead.

Edited January 25 by Pete

[Phil]

46 minutes ago, Pete said:

I mean there are avenues to get rid of him. I think when he says "trade" he also includes buyout.

 

You can trade with a hight pick and retention and have the buyer hope it's just a bat fit in Calgary. But you're also looking at the most dire candidate. Do it again with Panarin.

 

Let's just say Panarin busts in the playoffs, and management wants to move on. That trade is going to require he provide a list of teams. He's not going to want to play on a losing team, or in say Winnipeg. So playoff teams only, for a playoff "non performer". You're going to need to retain...and let's be generous and say they retain 25% (even though we all know—it's gonna be 50%), that's about $3M dead cap and then you have to pay the players you're getting back because it's not going to be a 1:1...So how much cap are you saving? What's the point? On the other side, which competitive team could take him at $8M and not wreck their cap?

 

Look at Lafreniere, they could have traded him but they hitched him to Panarin instead.

 

I hear you. You're not wrong, and I guess neither is he. It just comes off to me like philosophized legalese. For most teams, trades just aren't a realistic option.