Game Analysis: #1 - 10/3/13 | New York Rangers @ Phoenix Coyotes Analysis

[Bluenote13]

Looks like a team trying to learn a new system while being on the road. Moments of brilliance and plenty of gaffs to go along with it. That's before you even consider the fact that they're missing two of their better wingers. Awfully difficult to make projections about this team given the circumstances.

Might as well sticky this, it's exactly what's going on. But it's also such an obvious answer that people tend to ignore it and go on tangents about how bad the team is.

Definitely some things to be concerned on, but it's probably going to take half a dozen games or so before we start to see a consistent game with fewer mental gaffs. Imagine they still have Torts hockey creeping into their game.

As far as passion goes, these guys don't want to lose. That's ridiculous, if that were the case you wouldn't have Dorsett and Nash out there trying to stir things up, and sticking up for Stepan. This team didn't enjoy losing last year, a coaching change and off season isn't going to change that fact. These are mostly young kids who want to have success, I think the NYRCC talk is a just cynical fans being paranoid.

This situation reminds me of Washington Capitals form the beginning of last season. They were brutal first and after 20 or so games (after they learner the new system and got it under their skins) they just launched of. In the playoffs they hit the wall ... ee Lundqvist ... but they were the better team in PO than us.

We need to be patient, it will take some time, we won't have puck possesion game like Detroit in 5 games, this is a long term run in the end of which we, hopefuly, emerge stronger.

And SBOB, although it seems their play is really luckluster and disinterested, experience says it is always like that when something new is learned on the fly, they just have to think more and don't act as quick as when they don't have to think about their moves and positioning.

I'm with you guys, way too much being made out of this game, and all of preseason while we're at it. I like the Caps from last year example. This team has similarities, mostly the makeup of the lineup(when healthy).

Preseason is overrated in hockey, lineups don't balance themselves out until the season starts, depending on the team it could take days, weeks or months. No one wants it to be months but if/when they start to gel it'll be worth the wait.

 

[pld459666]

Missing assignments and general confusion/indecision are not surprising when learning a new system. Hell, I expect indecisiveness no matter what system they are accustomed to.

However, barely making an effort to battle in the corners and protect the puck are not really things that need to be thought about, it should be instinctual. Overall, the team did not play with a lot of energy. The forechecking was abysmal and Callahan and Hags will help with that when they return. But some of the other players are going to have to battle a lot harder and be stronger on the puck if they want to play a possession game.

the 2nd paragraph is a complete mindset that a player or set of players have to have.

You have to WANT to engage the opposition to win those battles.

I'm not sure the Rangers have the heart for it.

I see to many players that are not willing enough to kill or die for a loose puck and that is a problem.

the team is full of soft minded individuals.

 

[Samuel Culper III]

we were in our own zone A LOT, hence Nash's lack of time on the ice. As you could see when he poke checked in Vbrata's 3rd goal, you don't want him in your own zone. I think that's why Pyatt had so many minutes was AV didn't want our "best offensive weapon" operating in our own zone.

But to agree with nearly everyone else, the team just looked like they were still getting used to a brand new system. Although the constant dump-ins were what worried me the most. Oh, the penalties were terrible too.

I'm fine with that justification, but I don't see why you want Pyatt in your own zone any more than Nash. This myth that Pyatt is a serviceable two-way player is way overblown. He may not be a liability,but he certainly isn't good. Why did Dominic Moore get so little ice time if we wanted defensively responsible guys? Also, it's not exactly an uncommon move to have guys who are responsible on for the defensive draw and then have them come straight to the bench once the puck is out of the zone. This could have gotten Nash on the ice more and gotten him in the game and involved. At the end of the day, there's no real explanation for Pyatt playing more than Nash.

 

[Boom Boom Geoffrion*]

And SBOB, although it seems their play is really luckluster and disinterested, experience says it is always like that when something new is learned on the fly, they just have to think more and don't act as quick as when they don't have to think about their moves and positioning.

When Torts took over and implemented his system, I didn't notice a lack of intensity with the players.

Without confidence, you can't play with intensity.

Horse ****. Of course you can. That's just an excuse. A really, really bad one.

 

[In Disgust]

I'm fine with that justification, but I don't see why you want Pyatt in your own zone any more than Nash. This myth that Pyatt is a serviceable two-way player is way overblown. He may not be a liability,but he certainly isn't good. Why did Dominic Moore get so little ice time if we wanted defensively responsible guys? Also, it's not exactly an uncommon move to have guys who are responsible on for the defensive draw and then have them come straight to the bench once the puck is out of the zone. This could have gotten Nash on the ice more and gotten him in the game and involved. At the end of the day, there's no real explanation for Pyatt playing more than Nash.

Aye, i agree. d. Moore looked good. Pyatt was like a lemming or something, no control over himself, slow, and destined to doom.

 

[LORDE]

Rangers lose=Rangers played bad.

Rangers win=Rangers played well

Do you folks realize there is an opponent on the ice?

Are you saying the NYR played even remotely well?

Because while I agree that Phoneix looked good, especially Smith... I thought we looked terrible. We looked disorganized (which is to be expected with a new system and having our #1 miss the entire training camp / pre-season due to $) and not having our Captain and one of our top LW.

That doesn't excuse the rest.

All of which I was highly unimpressed by.

I did like some of the passing and some of the transitioning. But there was a lot more to be dissapointed in than not. A lot. Including Nash and all the "depth" we now have.

 

[94now]

I'm with you guys, way too much being made out of this game, and all of preseason while we're at it. I like the Caps from last year example. This team has similarities, mostly the makeup of the lineup(when healthy).

Preseason is overrated in hockey, lineups don't balance themselves out until the season starts, depending on the team it could take days, weeks or months. No one wants it to be months but if/when they start to gel it'll be worth the wait.

So Nash was terrible because he is learning new system? The guy turned over every puck he has recieved. I hope it is learning the system or something. Otherwise, he is not ready for the season. I understand they do not dump-and-chase anymore. But if Nash cannot penetrate, who can?

 

[Callagraves]

at some point (and some would argue we are past that point - I would agree) that we need to stop looking at the guys behind the bench and look at the guys on the bench for what is really wrong with the Rangers.

Soft perimeter pass first players.

not surprising they can't score.

The guys on the bench have changed dramatically over the past 3 years. Under Torts, there was a mantra of defend first, play hard, get the puck deep, all of those silly little hockey cliches that make total sense.

I worry about the decision to bring in AV. I can see it working out, but I can also see it become a disaster of AV trying to turn the Rangers into the Canucks, paired with giving Pyatt all the ice time in the world (why he wasn't traded for a 7th, I'll never know).

I wasn't a fan of the Torts firing. I thought it was premature, and an error. I didn't think Torts had a good year, but I thought he'd earned one bad half a season.

There are other coaches, but frankly, I don't know if we can win with AV. He doesn't appear to be a motivator, he has a system that confounds most of our team, the penalty killing I saw last night was atrocious. I feel like he's the type of coach who'll let the locker room become a club house.

I is worried.

 

[stan the caddy]

So Nash was terrible because he is learning new system? The guy turned over every puck he has recieved. I hope it is learning the system or something. Otherwise, he is not ready for the season. I understand they do not dump-and-chase anymore. But if Nash cannot penetrate, who can?

They better get some pucks in deep. They won't survive playing up and down the ice hockey all year. I can remember maybe one good shift where they had the puck in Phoenix's end.

Phoenix also looked like a superior passing team and they aren't even filled with a lot of skilled players.

 

[Bluenote13]

So Nash was terrible because he is learning new system? The guy turned over every puck he has recieved. I hope it is learning the system or something. Otherwise, he is not ready for the season. I understand they do not dump-and-chase anymore. But if Nash cannot penetrate, who can?

Learning is not the right word. 'Adapting' to a system, while top line players are out, during a heavy road trip start to the season, you might not be running on all cylinders right off the bat.

AS far as intensity goes, I didn't really have a problem with one on one battles. Long shifts contributed to a few goals, so yeah, when guys are tired it looks like the intensity was low.

 

[True Blue]

at some point (and some would argue we are past that point - I would agree) that we need to stop looking at the guys behind the bench and look at the guys on the bench for what is really wrong with the Rangers.

Soft perimeter pass first players.

not surprising they can't score.

To a point, pld. Last year, the same players would not have stepped a toe on the ice with the kind of effort that was shown. The same players that floated last night, competed last year.

 

[Clown Fiesta]

So they lose 4-3?

If you are of the belief that neither of those goals would have swung the momentum back our way. Considering it would have been 2-1 had we scored. But it is what it is, not making excuses just saying things could have been different and that they got some decent chances.

Not going to argue about it.

 

[Cliffy1814]

I like how the D men joined in with the offense.

I hated everything else.

I'm not going to like AV, i think.

The breakout and transition through neutral zone looked really good. Once we got to the blue line though, confusion reigned. Do we dump? Does he want us to make a play?. As you say, D did a nice job jumping in and more importantly...getting back into position.

I think that playing offense 5 vs 5 as opposed to 3 vs 5 as we have done for the past few years will lead to more goals. When that will start happening though is anyone's guess?

 

[BarbaraAlphanse]

I remember on one instance, we had Brassard Richards and Zucc on the powerplay and each made these beautiful passes across the ice, and then Pouloit got it, and immediately dumped it...

Boyle needs to be slotted down to the 4th line.

Pyatt needs to go.

If Pouloit is going to be on a top 2 line, he can't be killing momentum like that, otherwise he has to go too. He was doing it all night.

Fast looked smart but wasn't very assertive. Miller was assertive but was holding his stick too tightly - product of nerves.

Richards on wing looked decent. If he can continue/improve my random prediction from a few weeks ago about him making us all eat crow on the wing will hold up.

Nash needs to be with Stepan and Hagelin/Kreider. Again, people need to understand skill sets and how they affect our talent. No one understood how having both Richards and Nash on Kreiders line would make him look worse. He improved after being placed with someone who would utilize his specific skill set better - i.e Miller. Nash on the other hand needs a center with vision (Stepan), defensive responsibility... and a winger who will vertically stretch the ice and keep defenders that extra step back. That extra step back is where Nash gets the time to control the puck, look up, and work magic. They were hoping that Gaborik and Richards along with Nash could be a superline last year. Richards lost his dominance as a center. Gaborik lost a step on speed.

Step made good and bad plays. Call it rust.

Zuccarello makes his linemates better. Only guy who saw the ice clearly and made good plays consistently last night. That crossbar shot would have been huge for the team if it had gone in.

I didn't really notice Brassard that much. He needs to start playing with passion again. 1 game in, don't want to jump the gun. Part of what happened to him in Col was that he lost the passion he came in with. He came in with it last year, don't want a repeat. He needs to be amped to have an effect.

Defense - no complaints. Staal looked great, lock him up. MDZ, aside from a few poor plays, looked decent.

Henrik was Henrik. 4 goals doesn't really tell the story, but he'll get in form. He usually has a sluggish beginning to seasons anyway.

Loved transition game, however, the team is defitely still adjusting. They're forcing way too many pucks across ice, even if there is a lot of traffic. Gotta use their heads a little more. AV more puck possession but not at that expense. They're trying to go from one extreme (Torts dump and chase) to the next, just cross ice passing. They'll figure it out soon.

Cally, Hagelin, and Kreider will be huge. Think that Cally will ignite some passion in these guys. Hagelin will be the speed spark plug we need. Have a feeling that Fast might be a little overwhelmed out there. Wouldn't be surprised to see him sent down while Kreider is sent up (if he starts the AHL season on fire... big if).

Give the team a couple of games. We will get there.

 

[JohnC]

I look at where it says game 1 then I look at this thread and just laugh a lot

 

[Bardof425*]

You don't need to full understanding of a system to play with intensity.

true but if you are not sure where to be on the ice you will think instead of react. And that delay will slow you down and make you appear less aggressive. However, if you feel like they were passive in 50/50 battles, there's no excuse for that.

 

[PlamsUnlimited]

I look at where it says game 1 then I look at this thread and just laugh a lot

I sit and sulk because we lost. But I really don't like the way the D played. But the lack of finishing ability drives me banananananas.

 

[Boom Boom Geoffrion*]

true but if you are not sure where to be on the ice you will think instead of react. And that delay will slow you down and make you appear less aggressive. However, if you feel like they were passive in 50/50 battles, there's no excuse for that.

These guys have been playing hockey their entire lives. They know where they're supposed to be, regardless of what system they're playing.

You guys put too much emphasis on systems. Stop the excuses.

 

[n8]

although Sam said the contrary (possibly because i didn't see the whole game) I noticed a noticeable drop in shot blocking in our zone. We don't have to subscribe to Torts sacrifice all ways but you got to at least take a knee and close that lane. many uncontested shots from the point from what i saw which means a harder job for Hank.

 

[Raspewtin]

I feel like in recent years this team just absolutely falls apart without Cally. He keeps this ****hshow together, wonder what we look like when he comes back.

 

[PlamsUnlimited]

Will say this: Why can't our guys finish chances down low or something? Don't say "they don't have the killer instinct", that's what a 3 year old answers. They get their chances but seem to not be able to take the final few steps, and then the puck's going the other way before we know it. To start, I think some players' ice position during these chances helps to either ruin them or not... EX: Puck going back down ice with what seemingly is a long time before we get it back, or no guys in front of the net or near it when needed.

 

[aufheben]

Its one lousy game in a full 82 game season.

When did Staal become Mr. Offensive Defenseman scoring goals like that? He discussed doing more skating than usual over the summer than he had in previous summers. It shows. Even with Staal not having full vision in the right eye,he seems to be Staal.

The Rangers were very sloppy. They still don't know when to pressure the puck carrier in their zone. When they do pressure at the wrong time,it leaves other players open. That takes time. They played the exact opposite for 4 years.

AV used basically 3 forwards on the PK. Boyle,Pyatt and Moore. Pyatt?

Too bad the Rangers are off until Monday.

I'm just astounded that people don't understand such a simple concept. It's the first game of the season and people are talking about the team like that was the end product.

Also, give credit to Mike Smith.

 

[RiceCooker]

I noticed a little more puck movement on the PP which is good(less dump and chase), but a lot of the players were handling the puck like it was a grenade and the passing still isn't crisp.

 

[haveandare]

I'm not even going to get into all the problems, since they're well documented here and they're to be expected under the circumstances for the most part.

On the plus side, Richards had his best game in a while. Looked like he had some confidence in his decision making that had been missing for a long time now. Staal looked sharp all game. There were a few plays that were nicer than almost anything we saw all last year, but of course that doesn't mean much if they can't finish them. Let's hope they build off of that going forward.

Can't wait to have Hagelin - Stepan - Nash reunited. Best line this team has had in a long, long time.

 

[NickyFotiu]

Zooks beat Smith clean. If that puck goes in instead of hitting the crossbar we may have had a different game at 2-2.

Some people are longing for Torts after 1 loss. Ironically on the Vancouver board some people are not optimistic about Torts after they lost 4-1 as well.