How Good Are the 2013-14 Rangers (Part II)

[SnowblindNYR]

What amazes me is that whenever I watch games from 94 I'm never blown away by their toughness but rather their skill yet we need to be tougher!

 

[Tawnos]

Which team do you think is the real Rangers and why, the one who struggled in to a wild card spot or the team that has played its way solidly to a near playoff gaurantee with a good shot of taking second in the Metro?

It's a full season, not 65 games. The team never "struggled into a wild card spot."

(I know that you were directing that at a specific viewpoint, so am I.)

 

[Thirty One]

Nash is a good example of a big dude who plays small. Part of it is a mindset. The opposition in the playoffs isn't going to let pond hockey occur. They're going to target Nash and pop him. Is this the year that he will persevere through the punishment and continue to be engaged? I sure hope so, but I have my doubts. I think theres quite a few players on this team that shrink when the physicality ramps up.

OK, but the concern you expressed was that the Rangers would wear down physically because of their lack of size.

Zuccarello has 7 points in 13 playoff games (tiny sample, but since when do we care about that?!). St. Louis has 68 points in 63 playoff games. He had 4 goals and 3 assists in the ECF against Boston in 2011.

I hope the Rangers' opposition out-hits the Rangers badly in the playoffs. You can't hit if you have the puck.

It has been demonstrated many times that puck possession is predictive of playoff success. It has never been demonstrated that size/toughness/jam/moxy is. I wonder why that is...

 

[Thirty One]

Chicago has the type of players to play any game they want. Also, I love how people are constantly sarcastic about the Bruins when they embarrassed us last year and have been one of the league's premier teams for years now.

The Bruins beat the Rangers 4-1, outscored them 16-10, outshot them 186-157. They were better, but I think embarrassing is a reach.

But were they better because they're bigger and stronger, or because they are more skilled?

You dont advance with scoring by committee. You advance with goaltending, two or three dominant stars, and depth.

Ah yes, the good ol' Stanley Cup blueprint!

 

[BlueshirtBlitz]

OK, but the concern you expressed was that the Rangers would wear down physically because of their lack of size.

Zuccarello has 7 points in 13 playoff games (tiny sample, but since when do we care about that?!). St. Louis has 68 points in 63 playoff games. He had 4 goals and 3 assists in the ECF against Boston in 2011.

I hope the Rangers' opposition out-hits the Rangers badly in the playoffs. You can't hit if you have the puck.

It has been demonstrated many times that puck possession is predictive of playoff success. It has never been demonstrated that size/toughness/jam/moxy is. I wonder why that is...

Alright, Dallas, settle down there.

Srsly though, I agree. I'm not worried about the Bruin's physically beating us. I'm worried that they're basically a more skilled version of us from defenseman 1-6 and forwards 1-12. Lucic can goon it up in the corners in any zone he wants all he wants as long as it means somebody is holding the puck and getting the puck in a position where it will eventually be put on net. And then our usual advantage in goaltending is negated by the fact Tuke has been so good this season.

 

[Thirty One]

Alright, Dallas, settle down there.

Srsly though, I agree. I'm not worried about the Bruin's physically beating us. I'm worried that they're basically a more skilled version of us from defenseman 1-6 and forwards 1-12. And then our usual advantage in goaltending is negated by the fact Tuke has been so good this season.

I disagree that they have a better blueline. Certainly more forward depth though.

 

[BlueshirtBlitz]

I disagree that they have a better blueline. Certainly more forward depth though.

I haven't really followed the Broons this season, and maybe with McDonagh's ascent into the hockey pantheon you're right, but I was under the impression that Chara down to Krug was probably more well-rounded than McD, G and Staal.

 

[Thirty One]

I haven't really followed the Broons this season, and maybe with McDonagh's ascent into the hockey pantheon you're right, but I was under the impression that Chara down to Krug was probably more well-rounded than McD, G and Staal.

Seidenberg is done for the year. They definitely have a great blueline, but I'd take the Rangers' any day.

 

[Cassano]

Are you saying that the Bruins are not that good?

And just look at Chicago's roster. What names stick out?

I definitely did not say that. But with that way toughness is endorsed here, you'd think the Bruins would've embarrassed the Blackhawks, the softest team in the NHL.

Chicago has Sharp, Kane, Toews, Hossa, Keith - these 5 stick out as the most skilled players in the league.

 

[TheDirtyH]

Seidenberg is done for the year. They definitely have a great blueline, but I'd take the Rangers' any day.

That and with Dom Moore ad Boyle clicking so well, I like the fourth line we have as opposed to last year when the Bruin's "Merlot" line devastated us.

 

[Thirty One]

That and with Dom Moore ad Boyle clicking so well, I like the fourth line we have as opposed to last year when the Bruin's "Merlot" line devastated us.

The Haley - Newbury - Dorsett line was probably Tortorella's worst idea.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

OK, but the concern you expressed was that the Rangers would wear down physically because of their lack of size.

Zuccarello has 7 points in 13 playoff games (tiny sample, but since when do we care about that?!). St. Louis has 68 points in 63 playoff games. He had 4 goals and 3 assists in the ECF against Boston in 2011.

I hope the Rangers' opposition out-hits the Rangers badly in the playoffs. You can't hit if you have the puck.

It has been demonstrated many times that puck possession is predictive of playoff success. It has never been demonstrated that size/toughness/jam/moxy is. I wonder why that is...

Because time holding onto the puck is measurable and hitting someone in the mouth/intimidating them is not. Both have their uses in the grand scope of the game.

 

[Thirty One]

Because time holding onto the puck is measurable and hitting someone in the mouth/intimidating them is not. Both have their uses in the grand scope of the game.

I don't think a team that can be intimidated would ever make the playoffs.

 

[True Blue]

Chicago has Sharp, Kane, Toews, Hossa, Keith - these 5 stick out as the most skilled players in the league.

That should probably answer the questions as to how Chicago beat Boston.

 

[Thirty One]

That should probably answer the questions as to how Chicago beat Boston.

How did Phoenix beat Chicago?

 

[TheDirtyH]

How did Phoenix beat Chicago?

The big 5. Doan...Yandle...Boedker...Tippet?...Tippet?

 

[True Blue]

How did Phoenix beat Chicago?

Que the anything can happen discussion......

 

[Inferno]

Rangers wont have to play Bawstun till the ECF if both teams make it that far, which I highly doubt both of them (read, us) will.

Bawstun will likely have to go through Montreal which could give them fits...why? Montreal is a fast team with small players who are slippery. they have balance, and are a tough matchup problem for them.

Bawstun, while a great team, arent as invulnerable as people make them out to be.

In that blowout loss we had to them a few games ago, we absolutely dominated them for the first 30-40 minutes. Rask kept 'em in the game.

Right now i'm more concerned about us getting into the playoffs. let's secure a spot, then worry about all these other ancillary things.

Rangers, to me, are a much better team than their record indicates.

 

[Pizza]

I don't think a team that can be intimidated would ever make the playoffs.

Boy has this argument been beaten like an old rug from both sides of the issue.

One side favors skill but will admit that at least a little toughness and grit is good in helping to balance a team better for a Cup run.

The other side favors size and toughness blended with skill and speed.

I'm just not sure what people still debate over at this point.

 

[Cassano]

That should probably answer the questions as to how Chicago beat Boston.

Exactly. They beat them with skill.

 

[aufheben]

Chicago is soft?

What amazes me is that whenever I watch games from 94 I'm never blown away by their toughness but rather their skill yet we need to be tougher!

Like Chicago, they had an absurd amount of skill, but they had more than just skill.

 

[Thirty One]

Chicago is soft?

I would certainly say so. Their lineup from Tuesday: http://www.nhl.com/scores/htmlreports/20132014/ES021086.HTM

They're last in the league in road hits, behind 29th by a long-shot.

 

[aufheben]

I would disagree with calling them "soft". They have a great amount of skill, and can usually overpower teams with just that, at least in the regular season, but if it get's rough they have guys that step up. Regardless, we don't have near their skill level, IMO.

 

[Thirty One]

I would disagree with calling them "soft". They have a great amount of skill, and can usually overpower teams with just that, at least in the regular season, but if it get's rough they have guys that step up. Regardless, we don't have near their skill level, IMO.

Do you think the Rangers are soft?

 

[aufheben]

Not particularly. Tbh, I don't think the Rangers particularly excel in any areas, besides possession and shots on goal, and the PK. And obvious we have a great goalie with a good defense in front of him, as to be expected.