FLYLine27*
BUCH
Well, i think you would find yourself in the minority with that, but to each their own.
Player Discussion Jimmy Vesey
- Thread starter RangerBoy
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
- Status
Well, i think you would find yourself in the minority with that, but to each their own.
silverfish
got perma'd
Tell me what the HFNYR reaction would have been if that goal was against Lundqvist?
Everyone would be (rightfully) ****ting on Hank.
I'm dying to know what the xG was on that shot, but I'm uncertain Corsica releases PBP xG.
FLYLine27*
BUCH
silverfish
got perma'd
I have no idea what a xG is
Expected goals. Essentially a weight or a percentage (you can think of it that way) of how likely a shot is to become a goal.
I'd imagine the xG of that Vesey shot was very low. It wasn't a good goal allowed by Bishop. Credit Vesey for putting that shot far post, sure, but Bishop has to save that shot.
There's this thing on HF where only our goalies let up bad goals. If our team scores, it was a "great shot". If the other team scores, it was "omg Hank. $8.5m for that!? Put in Raanta!" etc...
That was a stoppable goal but goalies give up worse goals than that on the nightly basis. It was both a good play and a stoppable goal. I'm pretty sure Canes fans however aren't arguing about how both Skinner goals against us were stoppable. I don't know what your point is anyway. No Vesey is not scoring >48 goals this season. It's possible that he gets more shots as the season goes on too so his % don't look as comical because of that too.
silverfish
got perma'd
I'm not really making a point. I'm just trying to provide some different ways to look at things is all.
Draft Guru
Registered User
Please tell me more about this horrible bad play by Bishop. It wasn't a puck that squeezed through his arm or legs. It was a perfectly placed shot above the pad and below the blocker. Vesey has an uncontested shot on his forehand from 20 feet out. If our defense gives up this shot on Henrik it's not his fault unless it goes through him.
silverfish
got perma'd
Please tell me more about this horrible bad play by Bishop. It wasn't a puck that squeezed through his arm or legs. It was a perfectly placed shot above the pad and below the blocker. Vesey has an uncontested shot on his forehand from 20 feet out. If our defense gives up this shot on Henrik it's not his fault unless it goes through him.
It's a shot from the faceoff dot that he can see clearly. He got beat. And he got beat bad.
If Lundqvist gives up that goal, I ridicule the defense for allowing a shot in the first place. I applaud the defense for allowing Lundqvist to see the shot cleanly. I destroy Lundqvist for giving up a soft goal.
That wasn't the best goal to give up, but "beat bad"? No freaking way
I love that Vesey goes to the net like he was born to do it, and that is also the reason I don't think he'll go into many prolonged slumps. He kind of reminds me of Zach Parise... not overly fancy but knows where to be to score and has the basics down pat. If you give him the puck in a good spot he'll more than likely put it in.
I love that Vesey goes to the net like he was born to do it, and that is also the reason I don't think he'll go into many prolonged slumps. He kind of reminds me of Zach Parise... not overly fancy but knows where to be to score and has the basics down pat. If you give him the puck in a good spot he'll more than likely put it in.
C'mon guys, it was a nice shot but if Hank gave that up there would be 3 pages of people criticizing him...and I'd be one of them. I'm sure Tampa fans were doing the same. Still about the best shot you can take from there.
Still love me some Vesey.
Still love me some Vesey.
That's a great shot that's a lot harder to stop than it looks.
He's shooting across the grain back towards the post Bishop is moving away from.
Goal scorers goal.
He's shooting across the grain back towards the post Bishop is moving away from.
Goal scorers goal.
darko
Registered User
- Feb 16, 2009
- 70,272
- 7,803
You can't expect Bishop to save that Vesey shot. Open in the slot and a well placed shot plus Bishop was moving towards the near post and Vesey went the other way. If a goalie saves that it's a great play. Some people set massive standards for the goalies.
- Oct 23, 2014
- 30,327
- 43,005
Your not giving any context to the shot placement/location on net. It's not like he shot it on the ice through his pads. Then that's an example of getting 'beat bad'. However, it was perfectly placed. low blocker, just over the pad. The most targeted location in shootouts/breakaways because of the difficulty in stopping the puck when shot there with accuracy.
You should know that the shot location is in that 'high danger' area, and when perfectly placed just over the pad blocker side, I'd comfortably say very few if any goalies stop it despite having eyes on it.
silverfish
got perma'd
A shot from the faceoff dot is 'high danger'?
Looks like via Corsica.Hockey's scoring chances model, it's on the cusp of low danger... But this is the inherent issue with scoring chances. They're subjective.
I get it. It's our guy, so it's a snipe. But at least admit if Hank gives up that goal there are 5-10 pages in the GDT ripping him for it.
- Oct 23, 2014
- 30,327
- 43,005
A shot from the faceoff dot is 'high danger'?
Looks like via Corsica.Hockey's scoring chances model, it's on the cusp of low danger... But this is the inherent issue with scoring chances. They're subjective.
I get it. It's our guy, so it's a snipe. But at least admit if Hank gives up that goal there are 5-10 pages in the GDT ripping him for it.
Not all shots even from the same location are created equal. Vesey was on his offwing and in full stride with the puck on his stick when he let the shot go. Two big advantages. He dragged the puck a bit to the left of the dot too and had a lot of net to shoot at. His chance was certainly closer to being 'high' and not 'low' danger, I would think.
The Rangers and Vesey have consitently created shots just like these. In a vacuum, shots from that location aren't as valuable. In most cases the player probably doesn't get to walk in with the puck on his stick and the shots will probably be much more contested by defenses too. Goes back to the point of not all shots being equal even from the same distance/location.
A big reason why the Rangers Sh% is 'inflated' or 'unsustainable'. They are the best transition offense team in the league IMO and if you just look at the shot charts and distance without context, it doesn't truly represent the actual quality that the Rangers really have been able to generate. Because these shots are usually coming off the rush with speed and pucks on the stick, and lots of times, odd man situations(like Vesey's goal).
I doubt any of this can be confirmed or proven with stats but thats just my understanding based on what I've seen from NYR thus far.
Last edited:
silverfish
got perma'd
FLYLine27*
BUCH
- Oct 23, 2014
- 30,327
- 43,005
Wouldn't blame him, 100% honesty. Again it all comes down to context. Shot placement, oddman situation, puck in stride, offwing, all the time in the world to shoot etc.
Would you blame Henrik if Kucherov and him replace Bishop and Vesey in that situation? Probably not. You'd probably blame the Ranger player who turned the puck over in the first place to create that chance and the defensemen who commited to the winger on the outside and the one who got caught flatfooted and did nothing really (probably Girardi in the inverse siutation
)
silverfish
got perma'd
Wouldn't blame him, 100% honesty. Again it all comes down to context. Shot placement, oddman situation, puck in stride, offwing, all the time in the world to shoot etc.
Would you blame Henrik if Kucherov and him replace Bishop and Vesey in that situation? Probably not. You'd probably blame the Ranger player who turned the puck over in the first place to create that chance and the defensemen who commited to the winger on the outside and the one who got caught flatfooted and did nothing really (probably Girardi in the inverse siutation
I think I've posted it before, but on that goal, my reaction would be:
1. Terrible turnover
2. Great, we gave up a shot, that's not good
3. If we're going to give up a shot, at least we let Hank see it
4. Garbage goal by Hank.
That's my four-step process on that play.
- Oct 23, 2014
- 30,327
- 43,005
Fair enough but I'd have to disagree for the reasons mentioned. If the puck beat him through the arm and body or even fivehole I might lean more towards your stance.
Fact of the matter is Vesey scored. I really don't give a **** about what some expectorant stat says of how many goals or assists or points he should get or how some chart arbitrarily ranks danger of shots. Kid has been good. Getting in to open spots and, most importantly, capitalizing on his chances. Can anyone just be happy about that or do we need a chart to show expected happiness in the context of everything else going on in the world? Advanced stats, or how they're presented/used/the hyper-analysis of A SINGLE GOAL where a rookie showed something he is capable of, are borderline starting to make it painful to read about the games/players.
Last edited:
silverfish
got perma'd
Good play by Vesey.
Bad play by Bishop.
This argument has you that wound up? Don't like it, don't read it
darko
Registered User
- Feb 16, 2009
- 70,272
- 7,803
- Status
