GDT [RS] (#81) Rangers vs. New York Islanders — Revenge Is a Dish Best Served at 12:30pm, Nationally

[The Dude]

21 minutes ago, Ranger Lothbrok said:

Chiming in here with my usual (well-earned) pessimism. There's a reason that if you look at pundit picks for Cup champs this year, it's the same names we've heard since October: Colorado, Dallas, Boston, Carolina, Florida, etc. Not a one has picked us. I know sometimes we relish the whole "underdog" mentality, but I think there's an uncomfortable amount of truth in the whole "Fool's Gold" mentality. 

 

Yes, Igor rounding into form is better than any deadline add. And yes, one win and we tie up the President's Trophy. But how many Cup champs in the last decade have won BECAUSE of elite goaltending? If the team is deep enough, you can get away with a warm body in net. Jordan Binnington has a championship ring and zero Vezina votes. Henrik has zero rings and tons of Vezina votes. 

 

The offense is anemic at 5 on 5. Panarin has yet to show that he can produce in the playoffs. Zibanejad is, ostensibly, our #1 center. His production is at a near all-time low. He doesn't stack up favorably to the MacKinnons and Ahos of the world. Trouba makes this team worse defensively and gets more and more trust. Lafreniere may be ready to be a difference maker, but Kakko hasn't taken that next step. 

 

The precious "core" that we've hung out hats on are all 32-33. They have yet to show that they're gamers. Teams clamp down defensively, and refs let more stuff go. Soft hooking calls aren't going to get you meaningful PP time, and we've shown that we have very little going for us outside Shesterkin and the PP.

 

To put it more bluntly: I believe that every single team that is making the playoffs in the East other than the Capitals or the Red Wings is better built for playoff hockey than we are. I'd love to be proven wrong, but I really have yet to see the "want it" from this roster. Maybe last year's embarrassment is enough motivation, but they were totally gutless when pressured by a hated rival last year. 

 

I still think Shesterkin, Fox, Lafreniere, Kakko, Miller, Schneider, etc. are all part of a dangerous roster down the road. But I don't think the current group of veteran "stars" (Panarin, Zibanejad, Kreider) has what it takes to bring us to the promised land. This team SCREAMS first-round-exit-with-a-whimper to me. I doubt they even make it to 7 games in a series. 

 

And if you ask why I'm so pessimistic, well, one Cup in 84 years will do that to you. As will a first-round exit last year to a team that isn't even sniffing the playoffs this year despite being largely unchanged. We made Akira Schmid look like a world-beater. He can't even stay in the NHL. He's barely AHL qualify. What does that say about this offense when teams clamp down in the playoffs? 

The core is pretty much the same as last year and the year prior....  Why does the year prior get swept under the rug in terms of showing they are gamers? They went to the ECF and dragged every team they played into long series. How haven't they proven that they are gamers? 

 

You'll point to last seasons collapse against the Devils as a recent gauge for platlyoffs. But, that series was a PP extravaganza. I wish people would stop saying the refs put the whistles away in the playoffs.  It just isn't true anymore  

 

Game 1- 10 total penalties 

Game 2-  25 total penalties

Game 3-  10 total penalties 

Game 4- 5 total penalties 

Game  5- 14 total penalties 

Game  6-  9 total penalties 

Game 7-  7 total penalties 

 

There were a bunch of misconduct in game 2 and a couple in game 6. 

 

The PP is not going to be taken out of the equation. If the Rangers play their game,  they should be able to draw penalties. 

 

The Rangers inability to get in these nobody goalies heads is frustrating. Smid just had their number and the Devils benefited from quite a few posts hit by Panarin. This just happens. 

 

I honestly feel like there was some turmoil behind the scenes and the Gallant/Drury yelling match scenario,  was something that ran deeper than we are in the know about. Trocheck was also seen talking back to Gallant on the bench. I'm speculating that Gallant lost the room and it wasn't just because the room "just wanted to be coached"   What "it" was could be anything from interference from Drury, to too many new faces that took over the room.  

 

I'm not expecting a dominant run from this team. But I sure as shot think they have as good of a chance as everyone else.  On a level ice, and no favoritism from the league and refs. There's no team that scares me to the point that I think the Rangers don’t stand a chance. I feel like (unlike Gallant teams), this team can lose a game or 2, then adjust and figure it out with a game plan. 

 

I get the pessimism. I'm a Mets fan and a Rangee fan. I bleed pessimism. 

 

I just don't get how people are so dismissive about the coaching change. 

 

Hopefully,  you're wrong. 

 

 

[Pete]

1 hour ago, fletch said:

Laviolette has continued the organization's focus on taking ice time away from the young players and the bottom two lines because of problems with performance, which started well before his tenure.  If you have a leadership letter of C or A, then you largely are exempt from losing time on ice or power play time.  I would rather see more demanded of the young players, the checking lines, AND the core veterans.  But we'll see.

Or maybe, since you've seen multiple coaches behave this way (aside from one...Torts...and it changed nothing for his team or the player ...), it could be that your expectations are off?

[Abe Froman]

2 hours ago, BrooksBurner said:

No reflection on anyones opinion. Just love that movie. 

[Albatrosss]

Alright, kids. Its been almost 24 hours since the game ended. Go outside and play in the sun. 

[knedragon]

Key factors for them to make a run. They need to learn how to get of the D-zone and quick! They can't fall asleep for 5-10 minute spans. They get a goal and they need to come out and keep skating. Benn many times they score and right away the other team answers back in a minute or 2. Clean that up along with some better 5v5 play and then maybe a deep run.

[Br4d]

The Ranger's chances this year will come down to the Bread Line, MZ-CK-whoever, Adam Fox and Igor.

 

The first two lines will need to score at 5v5 and Fox will need to chip in there.  Igor will need to be great.

 

I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt until they prove they can't do this.

 

If I see Kreider shying away from contact on defense like he did last year in the Devil's series it will be an ominous portent.

[Vodka Drunkenski]

3 hours ago, The Dude said:

Except he was. Cant say he wasn't flopping around on goal 1. 

 

I'll take 5 goals, a fight and chippy play in 17 games from a guy that is playing with trash and cost a 7th round pick. 

 

People expected playoff type players at the deadline.  A few were had for very little. Zucker being one of them. 

 

OK.  You win. You got me to raise the white flag. Congrats O'doyle.  

Good job little buddy

[fletch]

2 hours ago, Pete said:

Or maybe, since you've seen multiple coaches behave this way (aside from one...Torts...and it changed nothing for his team or the player ...), it could be that your expectations are off?

Many players manage to work hard every shift.

 

Is it too much to ask for 15 solid shifts a game?   What should the threshold be?  12 good shifts a night?  8 good shifts a night?  Or is it OK to just show up for the third period with the game in the balance and make one play to generate the GWG?

 

The tragedy is when a player is capable of more, but fails to achieve.  The great ones (the legends) have the extra gear and drive to be the best.  The best coaches are able to get the best out of talented players, who may not have the internal drive or belief that they can be better.

 

And then there are the very good players with solid careers, who retire and are welcomed back with full-throated cheers.  And the regret that that player didn't earn a Cup.  Then come the excuses.  The surrounding cast wasn't good enough.  Faced a hot goaltender.  Got unlucky.  Ran into a team of destiny.

 

Lots of excuses over the years for this franchise.

[Pete]

15 minutes ago, fletch said:

Many players manage to work hard every shift.

 

Is it too much to ask for 15 solid shifts a game?   What should the threshold be?  12 good shifts a night?  8 good shifts a night?  Or is it OK to just show up for the third period with the game in the balance and make one play to generate the GWG?

 

 

I guess my point is that I've heard through about three coaches now about how vets aren't held accountable. With three head coaches minimum treating vets the same way, at what point do you have to look at your view of what accountability is and how it might not align with what actually happens in the NHL. 

 

Quote

The tragedy is when a player is capable of more, but fails to achieve.  The great ones (the legends) have the extra gear and drive to be the best.  The best coaches are able to get the best out of talented players, who may not have the internal drive or belief that they can be better.

 

 

 

And then there are the very good players with solid careers, who retire and are welcomed back with full-throated cheers.  And the regret that that player didn't earn a Cup.  Then come the excuses.  The surrounding cast wasn't good enough.  Faced a hot goaltender.  Got unlucky.  Ran into a team of destiny.

 

Lots of excuses over the years for this franchise.

I mean, I guess? The Stanley Cup is really hard to win. You list out those reasons (I won't use the word "excuse") as if they somehow aren't valid. 

[BrooksBurner]

4 hours ago, Ranger Lothbrok said:

Chiming in here with my usual (well-earned) pessimism. There's a reason that if you look at pundit picks for Cup champs this year, it's the same names we've heard since October: Colorado, Dallas, Boston, Carolina, Florida, etc. Not a one has picked us. I know sometimes we relish the whole "underdog" mentality, but I think there's an uncomfortable amount of truth in the whole "Fool's Gold" mentality. 

 

Yes, Igor rounding into form is better than any deadline add. And yes, one win and we tie up the President's Trophy. But how many Cup champs in the last decade have won BECAUSE of elite goaltending? If the team is deep enough, you can get away with a warm body in net. Jordan Binnington has a championship ring and zero Vezina votes. Henrik has zero rings and tons of Vezina votes. 

 

The offense is anemic at 5 on 5. Panarin has yet to show that he can produce in the playoffs. Zibanejad is, ostensibly, our #1 center. His production is at a near all-time low. He doesn't stack up favorably to the MacKinnons and Ahos of the world. Trouba makes this team worse defensively and gets more and more trust. Lafreniere may be ready to be a difference maker, but Kakko hasn't taken that next step. 

 

The precious "core" that we've hung out hats on are all 32-33. They have yet to show that they're gamers. Teams clamp down defensively, and refs let more stuff go. Soft hooking calls aren't going to get you meaningful PP time, and we've shown that we have very little going for us outside Shesterkin and the PP.

 

To put it more bluntly: I believe that every single team that is making the playoffs in the East other than the Capitals or the Red Wings is better built for playoff hockey than we are. I'd love to be proven wrong, but I really have yet to see the "want it" from this roster. Maybe last year's embarrassment is enough motivation, but they were totally gutless when pressured by a hated rival last year. 

 

I still think Shesterkin, Fox, Lafreniere, Kakko, Miller, Schneider, etc. are all part of a dangerous roster down the road. But I don't think the current group of veteran "stars" (Panarin, Zibanejad, Kreider) has what it takes to bring us to the promised land. This team SCREAMS first-round-exit-with-a-whimper to me. I doubt they even make it to 7 games in a series. 

 

And if you ask why I'm so pessimistic, well, one Cup in 84 years will do that to you. As will a first-round exit last year to a team that isn't even sniffing the playoffs this year despite being largely unchanged. We made Akira Schmid look like a world-beater. He can't even stay in the NHL. He's barely AHL qualify. What does that say about this offense when teams clamp down in the playoffs? 

End thread basically.

 

And we’re all rooting for them the same, just with different perspectives and expectations.

[Pete]

8 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

End thread basically.

 

And we’re all rooting for them the same, just with different perspectives and expectations.

Why would that be the end of the thread? 

 

I can rebut every single negative laid out there with a positive. But I'm not going to do that, cuz I've already done it enough in various threads.

[fletch]

Let's look at the St Louis Blues in their Stanley Cup Year of 2018-2019.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_St._Louis_Blues_seasons

https://www.hockey-reference.com/teams/STL/2019.html

 

People spin their season different ways.

 

You can say firing Yeo and bringing in Craig Berube was the right coach at the right time for the team.

 

You can say that bringing in Ryan O'Reilly was the catalyst that put them over the top.

 

You can say that Binnington was unbelievably good when they brought him up in the regular season and throughout the post-season run.

 

I'll say that they had two scorers that had more than 60 points in the regular season (O'Reilly and Tarasenko) and that they certainly weren't the most talented team in the Western Conference.  What I remember from their playoff run is that they rolled four lines that brought it every shift - there was no coasting - and they were a hard team to play, with solid fundamental hockey plays, that no one could manage to knock out.

 

Did they get puck luck and fortunate bounces?  Yup.

 

Was it a long-shot that they would get a .920 caliber goalie when they brought up an unknown goalie?  Yup.

 

Did O'Reilly make an impact in the regular season and the playoffs?  Yup.

 

But they earned a Stanley Cup when they probably had the talent of a team that usually gets knocked out in the first or second round.

 

I look forward to when I hear people call the Rangers hard instead of soft - because it will mean the franchise is on the right track.

[Abe Froman]

Lots of good points made on both sides of the discussion. I'm going to be cautiously optimistic.  I mean, I'm a Rangers fan after all. 

[Ranger Lothbrok]

I appreciate the good points made by Pete and fletch, and I get that there's two different lenses you can view each pro/con through. That's where the tiebreaker for me is simple history. Assume the worst, maybe you get pleasantly surprised. 

[BrooksBurner]

59 minutes ago, Pete said:

Why would that be the end of the thread? 

 

I can rebut every single negative laid out there with a positive. But I'm not going to do that, cuz I've already done it enough in various threads.

Doubt it

[Bieser]

The stats from Brooksie were convincing.  But as my old gambling buddies used to ask....  " Gun to your head" which team do you want to have to win to save your life?

 

I'm taking this year's team.  

[Sharpshooter]

The Rangers are on the precipice of winning the President's Trophy, league's best record, and nobody is picking them to win the Cup. Has that ever happened before? lol I don't really care what the pundits predict anyway, it's just funny.

[Pete]

30 minutes ago, Bieser said:

The stats from Brooksie were convincing.  But as my old gambling buddies used to ask....  " Gun to your head" which team do you want to have to win to save your life?

 

I'm taking this year's team.  

Agreed. Because they're a better team with a better coach. 

[Flynn]

19 hours ago, Ranger Lothbrok said:

Chiming in here with my usual (well-earned) pessimism. There's a reason that if you look at pundit picks for Cup champs this year, it's the same names we've heard since October: Colorado, Dallas, Boston, Carolina, Florida, etc. Not a one has picked us. I know sometimes we relish the whole "underdog" mentality, but I think there's an uncomfortable amount of truth in the whole "Fool's Gold" mentality. 

 

Yes, Igor rounding into form is better than any deadline add. And yes, one win and we tie up the President's Trophy. But how many Cup champs in the last decade have won BECAUSE of elite goaltending? If the team is deep enough, you can get away with a warm body in net. Jordan Binnington has a championship ring and zero Vezina votes. Henrik has zero rings and tons of Vezina votes. 

 

The offense is anemic at 5 on 5. Panarin has yet to show that he can produce in the playoffs. Zibanejad is, ostensibly, our #1 center. His production is at a near all-time low. He doesn't stack up favorably to the MacKinnons and Ahos of the world. Trouba makes this team worse defensively and gets more and more trust. Lafreniere may be ready to be a difference maker, but Kakko hasn't taken that next step. 

 

The precious "core" that we've hung out hats on are all 32-33. They have yet to show that they're gamers. Teams clamp down defensively, and refs let more stuff go. Soft hooking calls aren't going to get you meaningful PP time, and we've shown that we have very little going for us outside Shesterkin and the PP.

 

To put it more bluntly: I believe that every single team that is making the playoffs in the East other than the Capitals or the Red Wings is better built for playoff hockey than we are. I'd love to be proven wrong, but I really have yet to see the "want it" from this roster. Maybe last year's embarrassment is enough motivation, but they were totally gutless when pressured by a hated rival last year. 

 

I still think Shesterkin, Fox, Lafreniere, Kakko, Miller, Schneider, etc. are all part of a dangerous roster down the road. But I don't think the current group of veteran "stars" (Panarin, Zibanejad, Kreider) has what it takes to bring us to the promised land. This team SCREAMS first-round-exit-with-a-whimper to me. I doubt they even make it to 7 games in a series. 

 

And if you ask why I'm so pessimistic, well, one Cup in 84 years will do that to you. As will a first-round exit last year to a team that isn't even sniffing the playoffs this year despite being largely unchanged. We made Akira Schmid look like a world-beater. He can't even stay in the NHL. He's barely AHL qualify. What does that say about this offense when teams clamp down in the playoffs? 

I mean.. its hard to argue with 84 years of results and common sense... But after I read that I immediately pictured @Ranger Lothbrok standing in the mall on December 20th, telling every kid that just got off Santa's lap "you know kid, he's fake and there is no such thing as Santa" . 

[Pete]

Just now, Flynn said:

I mean.. its hard to argue with 84 years of results and common sense... But after I read that I immediately pictured @Ranger Lothbrok standing in the mall on December 20th, telling every kid that just got off Santa's lap "you know kid, he's fake and there is no such thing as Santa" . 

Yea. The "one cup in 84 years" is such an irrelevant narrative. Firstly no one here has had to live through the 84 years, except maybe @Sod16 and @Ozzy, and secondly unless it's been the same owner, GM, coach, players for all 84 years... Who fucking cares what happened in 1961, 1981, 2011, or 2021? 

 

[Sharpshooter]

Yeah, there are franchises that have never won and been around awhile, or maybe just one. Winning is hard, especially in this day and age where it's four rounds of seven games. Anything can happen. It's a reason why the NHL postseason is the best.

Edited April 15 by Sharpshooter

[Ozzy]

11 minutes ago, Pete said:

Yea. The "one cup in 84 years" is such an irrelevant narrative. Firstly no one here has had to live through the 84 years, except maybe @Sod16 and @Ozzy, and secondly unless it's been the same owner, GM, coach, players for all 84 years... Who fucking cares what happened in 1961, 1981, 2011, or 2021? 

 

 

Penalized GDT points!  LOL

 

You're a mad man!!! 

[Vodka Drunkenski]

6 minutes ago, Ozzy said:

 

Penalized GDT points!  LOL

 

You're a mad man!!! 

I would never insult you like that

[Flynn]

I see so much about metrics, and underlying data and terms like fools gold and underdog.. But you know what?

 

1. Fuck all that

2. Its impossible to luck yourself in to 54 (hopefully 55) wins.

 

If the team had gotten fat and happy beating up on the bottom of the league and failed whenever the opponent was quality, I'd have some concerns. 

The Team went 22-16 -1 vs. teams in the playoffs today. 14-8-1 vs the East (Florida 1-2 and surprisingly Washington 2-2 are the only teams we didn't win the season series) and 8-8 vs. the West (split with everyone except Col - 2-0, and Vegas 0-2).

 

Every team has warts- a couple favored teams will get bounced in round 1- it always happens.  

 

Let's fucking go

[Ranger Lothbrok]

1 hour ago, Flynn said:

I mean.. its hard to argue with 84 years of results and common sense... But after I read that I immediately pictured @Ranger Lothbrok standing in the mall on December 20th, telling every kid that just got off Santa's lap "you know kid, he's fake and there is no such thing as Santa" . 

 

That is eerily accurate. That is 100% what I would do. Definitely a "glass half empty" guy.