Half-season assessment

[5 4 Fighting]

Chimp, I for one, actually agree with most of the things you said, specifically Tortorella's way of coaching this team. I don't believe he is the man to take us to the promised land with his style of play. If you get out-coached non-stop by the Maclean's and DeBoer's of the hockey world, at least be able to notice certain patterns and try to correct it.The problem is Tortorella is a stubborn mule who never adjusts. All he can really do is take a time-out and bark a little bit.I don't ever see/hear Sullivan call Torts out or disagree with him...we need 2 minds, not a stubborn coach and his yes-man sidekick. Laviolette has been losing to us big time recently, but he knows it's not because he is getting out-coached, it's because of our goaltending and defense.

When we lose, it's because we get exploited. It's not an accident, so it's not one of those oh damn! We lost because we hit a post, no we lost because a snow shower there, and an extra wack there will throw us off our game and we won't retaliate. I said it once and i'll say it again. Dubinsky and Prust would never let that Silvferberg hot-shot snow Lundqvist like that. Instead of scoring his next shift, he would be hiding behind Neil for the third period.

Tortorella and Sullivan are the worst tacticians out there in the hockey-world, we really need to either hire someone who has a fresh perspective, or get rid of these coaches. We all know Sullivan ain't goin if Torts ain't getting canned. Time to move on with someone who actually has a feel for this team. I feel like we can benefit ten-fold from a coaching change, whether it's Torts, or Sully, I just want to see New York Rangers playoff hockey again. Don't make it to the ECF and then play all the way to the last game for an 8 seed on us this year.

As for your grades, Chimp, I agree with people saying it's too negative but only because we just won 4 straight before last night's 3rd period abomination. It looks like we are finally gelling, and Boyle is slowly starting to play himself off the team. Notice how he isn't chirping in the media anymore saying he is "Pissed off", he is done and he knows it. If he gets 1 last chance to prove his worth ( and I do think he's earned it), I really hope he takes it and never looks back. With Stepan/Richards/Miller/Powe/Halpern I think that's 2 guys who are 6 feet tall...every team can use size, you can't teach it.

Anyway, Let's see what happens down the line.

 

[Graves94]

Sheesh. Way......way Too glass half empty.

This team has had roughly half the line up turned over. The kids are all looking promising. Nash is an absolute monster. Stepan is playing his best ever hockey. Cally is playing like a guy that will have his sweater in the rafters some day.

The negativity here is just amazing sometimes. I mean is it clinical or something? Then I guess I could understand it.

Agree, on the first paragraph, which are all the positive things. However, you don't mention any negatives, which we know thare are many.
However, let me ask you, and other posters, are we an elite team in the east with the current squad. My answer is an emphatic NO!

 

[TankLarkin]

If The King was in top form we'd have another 5-7 points.

 

[aufheben]

I liked last season better.

 

[Son of Steinbrenner]

I got up to Dan Girardi, 5 and stopped reading.

Me too. This list is why people don't take Rangers fans seriously.

 

[cd211]

Me too. This list is why people don't take Rangers fans seriously.

hahah seriously... our players would be coveted by 29 other teams, and be playing top 6 and top 4 mins on all teams.. its embarrassing.. we turned over half our lineup, expect rookies to take those players roles, and then we had the injury bug when we were starting to pull things together.. people act like light switches here and its crazy.. be patient, have faith.. everythings always negative and half glass empty instead of half full..

 

[Chimpradamus]

I get it already, you don't like my initial assessment of Girardi, Stepan and Del Zotto, or Callahan even. I don't disagree they were too low and that I even admit in some cases was downright mean (Del Zotto), do I claim to be an expert? So, I corrected some of them slightly, because I don't disagree with your opinion in those cases. This is a hip shot, it's not like I did spend the last 2 days watching old games.

But the "stopped reading after x..." one liners I don't get. It's so much easier posting one row of text criticizing someone else than putting your nose out there to contribute. You call me out for being overly negative, so exactly how much positivity did you bring with you in your own post I might ask? I'm overly negative because this first half of the season has been overly disappointing and you don't even have to look in the standings. Switch Lundqvist with Bryzgalov and Torts is without a job and we would battle at the bottom of the conference. We have played like crap more games than not and too many on this team have relied on too few. That's not a good team, that's a playoff bubble team and that's exactly where we're currently at.

Callahan is a tricky player. He is extremely effective at what he does and he knows what he's good at. That's why he's going for the net (thankfully someone does). But I don't agree he has shown much of offensive skills, at least not what he has shown so far. He's getting the rebounds around the crease perimeter on the PP, that's not exactly Nash land for dangles, is it? He could arguably also get an 8, but he's a forward and he's not creating much offense at even strength. I know he's Captain America in here, but that's the truth. Hence he got a 7 (even though when I re-read what I wrote, it might look like I'm criticizing him more than I meant, but a 7 should be a hint of that).

I don't care that we came off a winning streak after losing last night, this is an assessment of the last 23 games, not the last 5. If I would listen to all of you IMDB voters, basically all players would've had 8-10's and putting a grade on them would've been useless.

http://www.hockeyprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=1467

This is the page where I got the Dan Girardi breakout percentage from. That got me thinking a little bit. Wth is this guy doing in the bottom 20 in breakout passes in the league? 15.8%?! So I started watching him more closely and sure enough, Dan Girardi has not been a good breakout passer this season, he's down there for a reason.

 

[McDunna with Fries]

This scale is inconsistent and nonsensical at best. You need to base it off something. If it's just performance-based, the numbers are way off. Is it performance compared to their contract? Is it performance compared to their expected performance? It seems like for some players you went with former and other players you went with the latter.

G and McD at 6 and Stralman at 7? What? Are we even watching the same games? Stralman has been good offensively at times but he's not even close to being as good as G and McD have been for us all season. Your analysis on both those players are so wrong. McD had a few bad games but overall has been really, really good. His offensive game reminds me of Stepan's earlier this season when he was getting his chances, but nothing was really going in. Girardi has been the pillar of our defense all season long. Stralman has produced way more offensively than we could have expected him to, but to say he's been better than G and McD is a joke.

Richards getting the same score as Boyle is a joke. Richards hasn't been himself or the 7m cap hit player he has to be, but Boyle has been absolutely invisible this season outside the faceoff circle.

Pyatt getting a 7 is a joke. Especially if Stepan is getting a 7 too. Pyatt was better than we imagined he'd be, but he's at best a 3rd or 4th line puck possession grinder guy that brings not much else to the table.

 

[Chimpradamus]

This scale is inconsistent and nonsensical at best. You need to base it off something. If it's just performance-based, the numbers are way off. Is it performance compared to their contract? Is it performance compared to their expected performance? It seems like for some players you went with former and other players you went with the latter.

G and McD at 6 and Stralman at 7? What? Are we even watching the same games? Stralman has been good offensively at times but he's not even close to being as good as G and McD have been for us all season. Your analysis on both those players are so wrong. McD had a few bad games but overall has been really, really good. His offensive game reminds me of Stepan's earlier this season when he was getting his chances, but nothing was really going in. Girardi has been the pillar of our defense all season long. Stralman has produced way more offensively than we could have expected him to, but to say he's been better than G and McD is a joke.

Richards getting the same score as Boyle is a joke. Richards hasn't been himself or the 7m cap hit player he has to be, but Boyle has been absolutely invisible this season outside the faceoff circle.

Pyatt getting a 7 is a joke. Especially if Stepan is getting a 7 too. Pyatt was better than we imagined he'd be, but he's at best a 3rd or 4th line puck possession grinder guy that brings not much else to the table.

Very good point. This is constructive. I will add an explanation at the start. In short, it's as much the expectations on the player as much as the performance. Perhaps I should even have separate grades, one for overall performance compared with teammates and one for how the individual expectations have been met. In fact, that's exactly what I should do.

 

[BlueshirtBlitz]

Not as good I thought we'd be. Getting on recently.

Go on another 4+ game streak starting on Sunday and that'll show what this team is made of.

 

[Bluenote13]

If The King was in top form we'd have another 5-7 points.

Great analysis

It certainly is a simple explanation.

 

[McDunna with Fries]

I see you made a few edits to your original post, but some things still completely make no sense, even if it's just your opinion. Girardi, our best Dman from last year and an All-Star, has only a 5 for this year's expectations? And this is while Stralman you expected 7 from and Bickel a 5? This makes no sense.

 

[Kokoschka]

I see you made a few edits to your original post, but some things still completely make no sense, even if it's just your opinion. Girardi, our best Dman from last year and an All-Star, has only a 5 for this year's expectations? And this is while Stralman you expected 7 from and Bickel a 5? This makes no sense.

It's actually quite clear to me: He expected Stu Bickel to suck and that's exactly what he got - in fact, Stu sucked even more than expected. He expected G to be better (as did I) than he is, hence the 5. Stralman has met expectations (probably exceeded them a little) hence the 7.

Correct me if I'm wrong, though.

And yeah, had he made this list before we went on a streak, there wouldn't be any bad blood towards him, I think.
And, to be honest here: We came into the season expecting to be running with the top dogs. Yet, we're nowhere near Boston and Pittsburgh.

That said, I'm willing to give them some time to find chemistry with each other. Get Gabby and Richards going. If we're going into the POs and are at #6 or better (very doable) I'd be okay.

 

[Chimpradamus]

I see you made a few edits to your original post, but some things still completely make no sense, even if it's just your opinion. Girardi, our best Dman from last year and an All-Star, has only a 5 for this year's expectations? And this is while Stralman you expected 7 from and Bickel a 5? This makes no sense.

That's because I expected more from Girardi when he has the puck, while he has handled himself well without the puck. That's why his expectation grade is average, he's supposed to be an All-Star. Strålman has been real solid and done more than expected from him, leading our offense in goals. Bickel has been exactly as bad as I expected him to be, that's why it isn't any lower.

edit: SoftEuro4thLiner is correct, you beat me to the punch.

 

[McDunna with Fries]

It's actually quite clear to me: He expected Stu Bickel to suck and that's exactly what he got - in fact, Stu sucked even more than expected. He expected G to be better (as did I) than he is, hence the 5. Stralman has met expectations (probably exceeded them a little) hence the 7.

Correct me if I'm wrong, though.

And yeah, had he made this list before we went on a streak, there wouldn't be any bad blood towards him, I think.
And, to be honest here: We came into the season expecting to be running with the top dogs. Yet, we're nowhere near Boston and Pittsburgh.

That said, I'm willing to give them some time to find chemistry with each other. Get Gabby and Richards going. If we're going into the POs and are at #6 or better (very doable) I'd be okay.

OOO. That makes more sense. He just wrote "expectation" so I thought that was the number he expected to get this season, not how the player has performed compared to their expectation.

 

[Pizza]

I liked last season better.

I liked chocolate better than vanilla bit there you are.

 

[haohmaru]

That's because I expected more from Girardi when he has the puck, while he has handled himself well without the puck. That's why his expectation grade is average, he's supposed to be an All-Star. Strålman has been real solid and done more than expected from him, leading our offense in goals. Bickel has been exactly as bad as I expected him to be, that's why it isn't any lower.

edit: SoftEuro4thLiner is correct, you beat me to the punch.

That makes more sense then. If a 5 is "meeting expectations" then I don't have a problem with most of your ratings. Most times, on a scale of 1-10, a 5 isn't all that flattering. Here it is.

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

I liked last season better.

I liked 94 better. Am I doing this right?

 

[NYR Sting]

If I can say one positive thing about Chimp's assessment, it's that the legend of Dan Girard has long since out grown the reality of Dan Girardi.

Dan Girardi is not, nor has he ever been the best defenseman on this team. Dan Girardi IS awful at breakout passes. Girardi is a really solid defender, and yes, he blocks a lot of shots and is a tough warrior, but he is also a poor offensive player.

This team really misses Michael Sauer, who brings all of the defensive positives that Girardi does, with the added bonus of being a terrific breakout passer and a better decision maker with the puck, especially when carrying the puck in his own zone.

Passing has brought this team's offense down for years; it was the big issue last year, and it has been the big issue this year. A big part of that is the passing from the defense, too.

 

[cd211]

It's actually quite clear to me: He expected Stu Bickel to suck and that's exactly what he got - in fact, Stu sucked even more than expected. He expected G to be better (as did I) than he is, hence the 5. Stralman has met expectations (probably exceeded them a little) hence the 7.

Correct me if I'm wrong, though.

And yeah, had he made this list before we went on a streak, there wouldn't be any bad blood towards him, I think.
And, to be honest here: We came into the season expecting to be running with the top dogs. Yet, we're nowhere near Boston and Pittsburgh.

That said, I'm willing to give them some time to find chemistry with each other. Get Gabby and Richards going. If we're going into the POs and are at #6 or better (very doable) I'd be okay.

Very true!! but boston and pitt didn't turn over half their offense!!they have had the same team for 3-4yrs now.. if we kept the same team as last year, everyone would have known their role and excelled at it.. we would have continued where we left off.. but the first few weeks we struggled bc we expected players to gel right away and without a true training camp, etc it had to take time.. we'll be fine and we saw how our team should play, then we had injuries and then we went on a good winning streak.. going forward we should be ok.. Boston is by far the deepest team there is in the NHL, hard to compare to them.. but we should pick up steam this second half..

 

[aufheben]

I liked chocolate better than vanilla bit there you are.

Just a joke. It's been a rough start to the year, no? They've been getting better with time, and should continue to. I think the team will be looking like a contender by the time the playoffs are here. My opinion, just stay the course.

 

[Pizza]

I'm joking too. We need to do that more around here, yes? And I still like Vanilla better than Chocolate. Or was it the other way round?

 

[Baby Punisher]

I had hoped for a fast start, but wasn't surprised where we have wound up. I figured if we stay true to form as we did last year we may pull it together around the 30 game mark. In a short season that could be a scary thing. Things seem to be panning out in that direction.

Gaborik kept us going the first part of the season Nash has kept us going since Gabs tailed off.

Lundquist still let's in too many soft goals. He isn't playing Venzia trophy type hockey.

Bolye is a bust. Waive him & be done with it. Torts got all he is ever gonna get outta him.

Halpren has been decent

Powe & Miller helped bring stability to the bottom 6.

Kreider who?? Kid needs a lot of work. Not gonna kill him cause he has been hurt. Hopefully he learns from this season.

Stepan has been very good. Hag's should be in double digits in goals.

Richards has been a disaster.

Cally has played his heart out & has come though when we have needed him, but he needs to score more. We need goals from him Plain & simple.

Our D has been ok.

Over all we have a long road ahead of us & I don't expect us to go very far if we make the playoffs.

 

[Kershaw]

Good team but not close to being SCF contenders.

 

[GarretJoseph*]

crap assessment. No pre-season. tons of injuries. players spending the last few months playing all over the place or not playing at all. it's gonna take some time.