Post-Game Talk: #6 - 10/20/19 | canucks @ RANGERS

[Chimpradamus]

Staal gives away a goal every game. We're in our zone the most when Staal is on the ice. He's been on the ice or in the box for >50% of goals against. Just tank on. 158 games to go.

Everybody knows he's useless, especially the opponents. He should've been bought out together with Girardi. Girardi has done the honourable thing and retired, since he realized he can't play at this level anymore. Yet Staal tanks on with steady garbage performances. If you're the opposing team and Staal is on the ice, you put pressure on him and he will give you alot back.

 

[egelband]

This is dad joke level.

And I am here for it.

@Amazing Kreiderman got the most reluctant "like" ever from me. So painful. But it took a lot of - may I say 'grit'? - to make that post.

 

[Brooklyn Ranger]

I don't even know how to feel about Smith now. I hate him, but he's also not crazy horrible this season so far. I might hate Quinn more for his psycho line combos and playing Smith 20 mins a night.

Smith's not playing 20 minutes a night--it's actually around 11-12 minutes a game. And that's including minutes where he's playing defense on the penalty kill. He's playing well.

 

[Larrybiv]

Hahahaha, the refs even managed to play some defense at the end, branching out from just ****ing us with the whistles.

Man, everything was pointing towards us tying that game. TWICE they got "involved" in that one sequence, disrupting the flow we had going.

 

[offdacrossbar]

If they can play whole games the way they played that third, they can beat 80% of the teams in this league.

No idea what happened that period but it was night and day.

Fast was excellent today also.

tired opponent who figured game over. who could blame them, we mailed in the first 30

then 3rd period of a road back to back across the entire country

that would be my guess anyway

 

[mandiblesofdoom]

Haley played 5 minutes. Who cares if he plays? I'd rather have Haley in the lineup playing 5 mins/game than McKegg in the lineup playing 10 minutes.

We could have a good fourth line. But we won't if Haley is in the lineup. Him playing means less of Lias & whoever is unlucky enough to be the other wing.

 

[charliemurphy]

What a stinker. I took my nephew and he summed it up perfectly... they played about 16-18 minutes of good hockey the entire game. No doubt the line juggling is impacting any sense of chemistry. Smith being one of the better forwards in a game is saying something, lol.

 

[SA16]

We could have a good fourth line. But we won't if Haley is in the lineup. Him playing means less of Lias & whoever is unlucky enough to be the other wing.

I would rather have a bad 4th line that gets limited minutes than a good 4th line that gets a lot of minutes.

Also Haley isn't actually a bad player (for a 4th liner). He just takes an egregious amount of penalties.

 

[mandiblesofdoom]

I would rather have a bad 4th line that gets limited minutes than a good 4th line that gets a lot of minutes.

Also Haley isn't actually a bad player (for a 4th liner). He just takes an egregious amount of penalties.

I remember when we went to the finals with a a good fourth line. Playing bad players is bad.

 

[Edge]

I'm OK with it as well but then I look at the Trouba, Panarin acquisitions and have to question what exactly the game plan really is.
Maybe with JD's influence, that may broaden the trade venue but I think moving Kreider as far as JG is concerned becomes all too predictable at this point.
JG, in typical lawyer mode, waits until the very last second and hopefully a trade works out.
Either way I think Kreider is a goner IMO

While I don't necessarily agree with it, I believe the gameplan was to get higher-end talent to shoulder the load, and hopefully still be in their prime when the young talent takes shape.

I mean for as bad as this team has been, one could argue they'd be 0-6 if not for their off-season acquisitions.

 

[Edge]

It is only six games. Still, he looks toast with no finishing touch to speak of.

He'll be better than he is right now, and the pendulum will likely swing the other way --- with a renewed hesitation to move him at all.

 

[Edge]

Sound like someone’s who seen this before. Ha
Well done

The 2020-21 season was always the one I had higher expectations for.

I can't say I've ever drifted from my feeling that 2018, 2019 and 2020 were going to be difficult seasons to endure.

I think they'll be worthwhile in the long run, but we're not close to being there yet.

 

[Deleted member 23124]

The 2020-21 season was always the one I had higher expectations for.

I can't save I've ever drifted from my feeling that 2018, 2019 and 2020 were going to be difficult seasons to endure.

I think they'll be worthwhile in the long run, but we're not close to being there yet.

I couldn't agree more.

 

[Gardner McKay]

I’m getting really sick of Giannone calling him ”Kaapo”. I know both his names sound similar but it’s not that ****ing difficult to remember Kakko is his last name .

He, as well as others also refer to Zibby by his first name as well. Valiquette refers to Lundqvist as Henrik quite often. It happens.

 

[mas0764]

I couldn't agree more.

I thought the team this year would be a little better -- but under the assumption that Kakko would be an instant 40-60 point player thereby replicating a guy like Zucc's production. Maybe he steps it up as the season goes along but right now Kakko isn't making an impact on that level. I also assumed guys like Andersson, Howden, Chytil and Kravtsov taking steps/making contributions, and they are not, at least not yet.

But hey, as long as those guys are on development track for success, I couldn't care less if we lose. I'll take Lafreniere or Byfield or Raymond or Holtz or Lundell here.

 

[Edge]

I thought the team this year would be a little better -- but under the assumption that Kakko would be an instant 40-60 point player thereby replicating a guy like Zucc's production. Maybe he steps it up as the season goes along but right now Kakko isn't making an impact on that level. I also assumed guys like Andersson, Howden, Chytil and Kravtsov taking steps/making contributions, and they are not, at least not yet.

But hey, as long as those guys are on development track for success, I couldn't care less if we lose. I'll take Lafreniere or Byfield or Raymond or Holtz or Lundell here.

One of the cautions I have when it comes to teams with multiple unknowns is that optimistic projections often rely on a greater number of moving parts all falling into line.

Every team has varying degrees of the unknown; some more than others. But in the case of the Rangers, a lot of hope is based around unknown commodities: guys in more central roles, hitting new career highs, young guys putting the pieces together sooner rather than later, etc.

Now, having said that, I think there will be times this season where you really start to see pieces come together. But we're still in the stage where this team is like a light fixture with a faulty wire --- it's not necessarily shining bright all the time.

 

[mas0764]

While I don't necessarily agree with it, I believe the gameplan was to get higher-end talent to shoulder the load, and hopefully still be in their prime when the young talent takes shape.

I mean for as bad as this team has been, one could argue they'd be 0-6 if not for their off-season acquisitions.

Respectfully, I'll again say the plan makes complete sense to me as long as they follow through with trading Kreider. You can't ice a team of all guys on ELCs. Panarin was an opportunity and they took it -- he was a guy they drew a line in the sand for, but he was willing to work with them on $$$ cause he wanted to be here. $11m a year is a lot but if Kreider was gonna get $7m, it kinda evens out when you figure in how much more production you're gonna get from Panarin. If they have earmarked one big time veteran winger contract to take the pressure off the kids, I don't care if that's $11m on Panarin instead of $7m on Kreider. Re-signing Kreider is what would make me start questioning.... because it's then like, "uh, where is he playing for that $7m a year? As soon as Kakko and Chytil and Kravstov are up to speed, is Kreider a third liner? For $7m?" That's not good asset allocation, but $11m on a top line 80 point winger is just fine.

The Trouba move I actually liked a little less because he's really not a #1D. He's more like a #2D though still capable of being a top pairing. The trade value (giving WPG back their first plus Pionk) was too good to pass up, I guess, so I understand it from that perspective, but that's a lot of money for a guy who isn't Panarin-level elite. Still, I approve at the end of the day because you are essentially just committing that big money of Staal and Smith and Shattenkirk to Trouba, only a year or two earlier than planned. But with a team of ELCs, we have money to sign a couple impact FAs. Their calculus seemed to be, Trouba is better than anyone we will get in a year or two, and he's young enough that signing a 27 year old in 2021 ends up being a wash for future production.

I get it. It's all fine by me. As I said, if they re-sign Kreider, that's where they lose me. Same with the Shattenkirk buy out... seems like buying out Staal and Smith was the better idea.

 

[ReggieDunlop68]

One of the cautions I have when it comes to teams with multiple unknowns is that optimistic projections often rely on a greater number of moving parts all falling into line.

Every team has varying degrees of the unknown; some more than others. But in the case of the Rangers, a lot of hope is based around unknown commodities: guys in more central roles, hitting new career highs, young guys putting the pieces together sooner rather than later, etc.

Now, having said that, I think there will be times this season where you really start to see pieces come together. But we're still in the stage where this team is like a light fixture with a faulty wire --- it's not necessarily shining bright all the time.

tl;dr: the fans were jive turkeys after the draft

 

[SA16]

I remember when we went to the finals with a a good fourth line. Playing bad players is bad.

I remember when the Penguins went to the finals with a good first and second line. Playing good players is good.

Not to mention when the Rangers went to the finals their 4th line of Boyle Moore and Dorsett wasn't even good with a 47 CF% and 33 GF%.

 

[NernieBichols]

The 2020-21 season was always the one I had higher expectations for.

I can't say I've ever drifted from my feeling that 2018, 2019 and 2020 were going to be difficult seasons to endure.

I think they'll be worthwhile in the long run, but we're not close to being there yet.

Now I’m just guessing. But based on the way you put it and your contacts and guys you have convos with. The rangers know what’s coming. It’s us who had the wrong expectations.

 

[Edge]

Respectfully, I'll again say the plan makes complete sense to me as long as they follow through with trading Kreider. You can't ice a team of all guys on ELCs. Panarin was an opportunity and they took it -- he was a guy they drew a line in the sand for, but he was willing to work with them on $$$ cause he wanted to be here. $11m a year is a lot but if Kreider was gonna get $7m, it kinda evens out when you figure in how much more production you're gonna get from Panarin. If they have earmarked one big time veteran winger contract to take the pressure off the kids, I don't care if that's $11m on Panarin instead of $7m on Kreider. Re-signing Kreider is what would make me start questioning.... because it's then like, "uh, where is he playing for that $7m a year? As soon as Kakko and Chytil and Kravstov are up to speed, is Kreider a third liner? For $7m?" That's not good asset allocation, but $11m on a top line 80 point winger is just fine.

The Trouba move I actually liked a little less because he's really not a #1D. He's more like a #2D though still capable of being a top pairing. The trade value (giving WPG back their first plus Pionk) was too good to pass up, I guess, so I understand it from that perspective, but that's a lot of money for a guy who isn't Panarin-level elite. Still, I approve at the end of the day because you are essentially just committing that big money of Staal and Smith and Shattenkirk to Trouba, only a year or two earlier than planned. But with a team of ELCs, we have money to sign a couple impact FAs. Their calculus seemed to be, Trouba is better than anyone we will get in a year or two, and he's young enough that signing a 27 year old in 2021 ends up being a wash for future production.

I get it. It's all fine by me. As I said, if they re-sign Kreider, that's where they lose me. Same with the Shattenkirk buy out... seems like buying out Staal and Smith was the better idea.

I continue to believe the Rangers will trade Kreider at some point this season.

 

[offdacrossbar]

seemingly being unprepared right out of the gate and starting games without the required effort and execution is non-negotiable for me.

i thought a quinn team was going to be all out on effort and preparation. that was 40 mins of disjointed effortless play yesterday.

thats unacceptable. and thats gotta be on quinn too.

guys like marc staal and chris kreider are supposed to be leaders on this team yet on the ice, they are lacking and thats hurting this team. both of those guys wear the A.

a young team needs leadership and not just in the room. young teams need their best players (and sometimes the guys making alot of $$) to play the best. leaders set the tone.

what tone is chris kreider setting ?

perhaps this team is lacking leadership ? something is wrong because what we witnessed yesterday at home against a tired road team playing the 2nd of a b2b was embarrassing.

 

[Edge]

Now I’m just guessing. But based on the way you put it and your contacts and guys you have convos with. The rangers know what’s coming. It’s us who had the wrong expectations.

I think the mindset has always been that the Rangers would love to have players push this team into the playoffs; but it wasn't the most important goal.

The most important goal is about developing the young players they've stockpiled, and seeing significant progress from said players.

I think the Rangers view making the playoffs but not seeing significant progress from young talent as a bigger net loss than than missing the playoffs but seeing significant progress from their young talent. Making the playoffs is a nice surprise; a lack of progress from young talent is a serious concern.

 

[mas0764]

Yeah, and I'm not panicking about whether they trade Kreider. I do assume that they will.

They moved Namestnikov at the first opportunity, so it tells me they are looking to deal guys who don't have a future here past this season.

 

[kovazub94]

I can promise you all that what you will remember of this season after it's over will be a whole a lot different than what you've seen so far in the first 6 game.