Player Discussion John Gilmour

[nyr2k2]

So Carey is sheltered, I guess...

He takes more of his starts in the defensive zone, so probably not. It's not by a huge margin though, and I don't know where to find QualComp stats or something comparable to indicate the level of players he's matched up against (all the sites I used to know are gone and I don't understand a lot of the newer stuff). But given that he's a fairly steady player who doesn't appear to be a defensive liability, I wouldn't say he's being sheltered, just not receiving much TOI because his offensive contributions are limited.

 

[Synergy27]

I'm not really bothered by it I just think it's used enough that it's out of context... if you "dock" a guy's D-zone starts and SH time, you're really sheltering the team and that's it... I'm not trying to change the dictionary... why don't forwards get "sheltered?" Besides when reporters talk about rookies.

You're talking about not playing a guy in some situations which is limiting or cutting and not sheltering his minutes... does Pau Carey play sheltered minutes?

No. Paul Carey plays a low number of minutes. The idea is that Shattenkirk is going to play say, 19 minutes a game no matter what. Sheltering is aligning those 19 minutes to offensive situations and/or times when the other team's big guns are not on the ice. This isn't a difficult or even controversial subject, is it?

 

[BobMarleyNYR]

No it's not... but you're literally talking about limiting ice time based on weakness... I don't know, it's just hard to conceptualize a top-pairing D who's 29 being "SHELTERED." Semantics, I guess, but you're literally talking about limiting his minutes and making him a 2nd pairing D. No minutes are being "sheltered," if anything, you could be overplaying someone as this should be a very green defense for a while. 'Temper' might be a better word, "sheltering" is what they do with rookies.

 

[Blais to Win]

Gilmour has some physical tools that are hard to find. Amazing speed and a good shot. Hope he grows into them as a defender.

 

[NYRFANMANI]

Looks to be a good depth option on D. 7-8ish, that can jump on the 3rd D-line, when neccessary. I mean on our future dream team ofc.

He's got speed and some O to him. He'll be 25 starting next season. Getting more experience would help his D and instincts.

 

[Inferno]

Looked like absolute garbage tonight...but then again...everyone who plays with ogara seems to look horrible.

 

[egelband]

Gilmour seems to be quite strong offensive on the rush and on the power play. Not breaking news, I know. But I think there is a spot on a good roster for Gilmour. Needs to be sheltered and/or get much better in his own end. But it’s still promising.

 

[kovazub94]

A prospect will have good and bad games. Given where Gilmour was at the beginning of a season his progression this far is pretty remarkable.

 

[Harbour Dog]

He was bad for what I seen of the game, and his numbers don't make it seem like he improved in the last period and a half.

O'Gara just destroys the guys he plays with though. Part of me wants to see O'Gara/Staal. Just for the spectacle.

 

[Vinny DeAngelo]

Gilmour seems to be quite strong offensive on the rush and on the power play. Not breaking news, I know. But I think there is a spot on a good roster for Gilmour. Needs to be sheltered and/or get much better in his own end. But it’s still promising.

As the 6th/7th defenseman. He’s horrible at making reads. If it wasn’t for his elite skating he’d have some solid experience at a day job by now

 

[True Blue]

So Carey is sheltered, I guess...

No, that is a bit different. Carey is a 4th liner. As such he is going to play in the league as a 4th liner (though maybe AV envisions him as a top player, who knows?). Shattenkirk is not such a player. He is is a gifted offensive player, who has serious defensive deficiencies. As such, you limit his time against the opposing teams top players and do not put him out during defensive draws. You try to have him on the ice during offensive draws and the PP as much as possible. Hiding Shattenkirk by sheltering him and playing a 4th liner as just that is a bit different in my mind.

 

[Ori]

I think he is much better in a new wing role position and also based on his small size. We can`t have hobbits defending against Malkin, it will not work in NHL or Anaheim, LA Kings, we will get murdered in our own D zone.

 

[RangerLifer]

Gilmour has some physical tools that are hard to find. Amazing speed and a good shot. Hope he grows into them as a defender.

I have to say he gets beat up in here a lot but he was called up at a point in the season where NHL'ers are geared up going into the playoffs.
I think if he starts with us next year at training camp and has the beginning of the season with us we'll see a much better player. I could be wrong but it is really tough for these inexperienced players being called up at this point of the season. I like Gilmour a lot.

 

[RangerLifer]

I think he is much better in a new wing role position and also based on his small size. We can`t have hobbits defending against Malkin, it will not work in NHL or Anaheim, LA Kings, we will get murdered in our own D zone.

I think his foot speed can make up for his lack of size.

 

[Edge]

Gilmour, to me, seems like a transitional player.

I could see him sticking for a season or two, before the next crop of young defensemen push him.

 

[kovazub94]

Gilmour, to me, seems like a transitional player.

I could see him sticking for a season or two, before the next crop of young defensemen push him.

Lol, I thought you were you "transitional" in a different way, i.e. to describe his style as an offensive defenseman. For instance to differentiate him from DeAngelo who's a playmaker/set up man on offense, Gilmour is more of a trailer, second wave option on the rush. He definitely has tools to be able to fullfil this role with a excellent speed and a good shot.

 

[Edge]

Lol, I thought you were you "transitional" in a different way, i.e. to describe his style as an offensive defenseman. For instance to differentiate him from DeAngelo who's a playmaker/set up man on offense, Gilmour is more of a trailer, second wave option on the rush. He definitely has tools to be able to fullfil this role with a excellent speed and a good shot.

Haha.

I agree with you on the style of play though.

 

[NoQuitInNewMexico]

Getting to Know John Gilmour

As Gilmour tells it, “I grew up in Montreal, Quebec. But I was late getting into hockey. I didn’t start skating until age six.”

By Montreal standards, that’s not just late, that’s like late-Jurassic Era late. Most kids in Montreal — or most of Canada for that matter — are skating by the time they’re 3-years-old.

“I hated it at first,” said Gilmour. “I didn’t want to continue, but my dad was persistent. And looking back, I’m glad he was.”

It’s a good thing his dad was persistent, otherwise, he wouldn’t be the swift-skating Rangers’ defenseman he’s become.
Maybe he would have played another sport.

“Growing up, I played soccer, swimming, baseball and hockey. Luckily, hockey prevailed,” reminisced Gilmour.

Of course, he could’ve had a career in the blossoming eSports industry.

As Gilmour recalls, “When NHL ‘09-’10 came out, I was playing every day. Eventually, I worked my way up to being ranked third in the world. But then school and hockey took over my time.”

Thankfully, Gilmour preferred playing in real-life compared to virtual reality.

And there’s nothing more real than playing in the NHL.

John Gilmour was a pro gamer

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

He's a very good offensive player, but his problem isn't only defense, he thinks the game really poorly. His decision making is dreadful.

 

[Harbour Dog]

I don't think his decision making is that bad, and his skating more than makes up for rookie mistakes. He has looked bad with O'Gara, but that has to be the most unfair, tiny, sample size to judge a guy on.

Look at both his and ADA's numbers when with O'Gara vs. with Skjei; it's absurd.

-- He is very aggressive with his pinches, I'll give you that.
But he recovers so well, I just don't see how it's going to be a problem, long term. --

 

[RGY]

He's a very good offensive player, but his problem isn't only defense, he thinks the game really poorly. His decision making is dreadful.

Everything about his defensive game is bad. This is a good post though. His positioning his bad too. He just gets completely lost out there

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

I wouldn't mind trying him out at forward. I think he could make the position switch, and put up 30-40 points at the position.

 

[True Blue]

Everything about his defensive game is bad. This is a good post though. His positioning his bad too. He just gets completely lost out there

You cannot have him and O'Gara in the same line up. And certainly not the two of them and Shattenkirk comprising half of your defense.

 

[RGY]

I wouldn't mind trying him out at forward. I think he could make the position switch, and put up 30-40 points at the position.

Still think he would be a negative out there. His hockey IQ is terrible. Being defensively responsible at the forward position in today’s NHL is just as important. Defenseman are faster, more active and more equipped. You dont have as many steel columns out there like you did before the lockout where you can have a winger cheating, exiting his own zone sooner to jumpstart the attack. They have to hold their ground a bit more. And so I don’t see Gilmour succeeding there either. He is smallish as it is. At the AHL and lower levels his blazing speed masked his deficiencies and even put him a step ahead of many players. Here, at the NHL he is severely exposed. I do not see it changing. You can just see he does not think the game the way he needs to play at this level. His anticipation is incredibly poor in addition to the positioning problem. I know some like him here, mainly for his speed, but he just doesnt have it and shouldnt be a part of this team moving forward.

 

[nyr2k2]

If he's stupid and has low IQ and no idea where to be positionally, I don't think moving him to forward is going to alleviate a whole lot. People bitch about Jimmy Vesey being a moron and having no idea what's going on and where to be. That would probably be the outcome of taking a low-IQ defender and moving him up top. I mean what would you be hoping for--a 2017 version of David Desharnais but on the wing? Does anyone want that? I mean I guess you can try it, but I would only advocate for moving Gilmour away from D if he proves he's absolutely incapable in--big part here--a different defensive system.

That said, I don't think he's that terrible defensively. He looks like a rookie who is more concerned with moving the puck than playing defense. I think he can be coached into a passable defensive player, which would be fine if his offense developed.