Toggle sidebar

Player Discussion Kevin Shattenkirk

  • 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
  • We're expeting server maintenance on March 3rd starting at midnight, there may be downtime during the work.
silverfish said:
It absolutely could have, but that's not for this thread.
Click to expand...

Are you saying...

230px-Jakub_Nakladal_160219.PNG
 
Inferno said:
just outta curiosity what are those same rankings in terms of playoff numbers?

Id pull it up myself, but its a little hard to do that on a phone...also ive got a theory that the rangers playing style is more suited to the regular season than the playoffs..will be interesting to see if thats true or not.
Click to expand...

I agree with your theory, but I don't really care about playoff numbers, to be honest. Sample is too small. I'd say a good regular season offensive team is a good offensive team. I wouldn't say that a good playoff offensive team is a good offensive team, because I don't know enough.

Anyway...

(Flipping to goals for per game here rather than raw total goals)

Since 2010, 13/17 (minimum 25 playoff games)*.
Since 2013, 9/18 (minimum 15 playoff games)*.
Since 2015, 8/14 (minimum 7 playoff games)*.

*cutoffs are arbitrary

SA16 said:
Are you saying...

230px-Jakub_Nakladal_160219.PNG
Click to expand...

I ****ing wish.
 
so theyre an average at best offensive team in the playoffs...this is why i think the loss of that Pouliot, brassard, and zucc line was so devastating..and why Hagelins loss is so painful...the rangers just cant play a cycle game...Hagelin and pouliot were amazing at that...keep the puck in the zone, generate offensive chances...sustain pressure..play in their end.

they could ALSO play the speed/rush game as well...ideal players for this idiotic system. Kreider is another. We need to get more players like that...fast, but can play the boards..dont necessarily have to shoot the puck 150MPH to be a good player. Kreider, Stalberg, Zucc, Hagelin, Pouliot, Nash..all guys who can do that....to a lesser extent JT miller is like this as well. But guys like Grabner..not so great on the boards...Hayes..not so great through the zone with speed...theres flaws in how youre putting this together....Lias + Filip seem to be more of the former than the latter, but we'll see i guess.
 
silverfish said:
I agree with your theory, but I don't really care about playoff numbers, to be honest. Sample is too small.
Click to expand...
You can't just wave your hands and say sample size is too small. Rangers played 540 regular season and 98 playoff games since 2010-11 season.
 
They are average in the playoffs in goal per game but last year they were ranked 3rd, yet they gave up more too.

The biggest issue I think is not the loss of some of those players, more so they do not have any players who will likely go to a point per game level in the playoffs, Pitt has two players who exceeded a point per game, and two others who were pretty close. Even Ottawa had Karlsson at .95 and Ryan at .79 Rangers had Zibanejad at .75 as the only player above .58

I am having trouble finding any Cup teams of recent who did not have at least one if not two players who were very near to, or exceeded a point per game.

I believe they will always run into a team who has some players like that. Those who can take over games. If that team also has enough good depth, has their game together, what advantage could a team who does not have those players ever have? My answer is goal tending but even with that as we have seen, they eventually run into a team who just has too many offensive weapons and comparable goal tending.
 
All depends on how he's used.

If AV uses him like Yandle, he's going to be between a rock and a hard place.

If they let him roll, and puts in his 10-15 goals and 45-55 points, and scores more than he lets in, he'll be fine.

If AV starts over-coaching, it could get a little interesting around here.
 
Edge said:
All depends on how he's used.

If AV uses him like Yandle, he's going to be between a rock and a hard place.

If they let him roll, and puts in his 10-15 goals and 45-55 points, and scores more than he lets in, he'll be fine.

If AV starts over-coaching, it could get a little interesting around here.
Click to expand...

So, pretty much, everyone buckle up.
 
sbjnyc said:
You can't just wave your hands and say sample size is too small. Rangers played 540 regular season and 98 playoff games since 2010-11 season.
Click to expand...

And? Are you asserting that the rangers circa 2011 are similar to the rangers of 2017? in the past 2 seasons, the rangers played 82 games each, in the playoffs they played a total of 5 and 12. Nevermind the structure of the games (a spread of 29 opponents vs 3). The N for playoff games is definitely way too small to be statistically reliable.
 
sbjnyc said:
You can't just wave your hands and say sample size is too small. Rangers played 540 regular season and 98 playoff games since 2010-11 season.
Click to expand...

Getting OT, but let me just say this...

To be fair, I don't like summing up mass years like that. Should've included that in my OP. It's like when people say JT Miller sucks in the playoffs because he's scored one goal in 40 playoff games. I don't like that. You're summing up 4 'bins' of low sample data across four seasons. You can't do that to draw a conclusion.

Really, what we should be doing, is going season by season. There's too much personnel overhaul year over year to draw mass conclusions from a team stat, especially in a 7 year window. So, here are the Rangers ranks in goals for since 2010...

16, 11, 15, 18, 3, 7, 4

Draw your own conclusions, I guess.
 
Chief Ranger said:
So, pretty much, everyone buckle up.
Click to expand...

I'll go on record now as saying that finding the right partner for Shattenkirk will be the single most important element of the Rangers defense for the upcoming season.

It's the keystone for just about everything else - deployment, results, AV's comfort level, etc. etc.
 
Edge said:
All depends on how he's used.

If AV uses him like Yandle, he's going to be between a rock and a hard place.

If they let him roll, and puts in his 10-15 goals and 45-55 points, and scores more than he lets in, he'll be fine.

If AV starts over-coaching, it could get a little interesting around here.
Click to expand...

AV- the "OVERCOACH"

i like it

the problem is shatty's too young. were he say....oh, i dont know, 33 and broke down, AV would play the hell out of him.

when push comes to shove, i fully expect the staal/holden pair to lead the team in minutes played.
 
silverfish said:
Getting OT, but let me just say this...

To be fair, I don't like summing up mass years like that. Should've included that in my OP. It's like when people say JT Miller sucks in the playoffs because he's scored one goal in 40 playoff games. I don't like that. You're summing up 4 'bins' of low sample data across four seasons. You can't do that to draw a conclusion.

Really, what we should be doing, is going season by season. There's too much personnel overhaul year over year to draw mass conclusions from a team stat, especially in a 7 year window. So, here are the Rangers ranks in goals for since 2010...

16, 11, 15, 18, 3, 7, 4

Draw your own conclusions, I guess.
Click to expand...


I'm too lazy to do it, but the best way to do it would be to establish a benchmark for each POs based on that year's reg season performance. Then compare over/under indexing relative to benchmark over time. My gut would wager that the NYR scoring droppoff reg -> pos over the last 5 seasons was higher than most teams. But would be interesting to really look at it, maybe I will in the Fall.
 
Edge said:
I'll go on record now as saying that finding the right partner for Shattenkirk will be the single most important element of the Rangers defense for the upcoming season.

It's the keystone for just about everything else - deployment, results, AV's comfort level, etc. etc.
Click to expand...

Dead on. I'll go one step further and say that partner will end up being someone other than Ryan McDonagh.
 
Trxjw said:
Dead on. I'll go one step further and say that partner will end up being someone other than Ryan McDonagh.
Click to expand...

he'll end up playing with Brady a lot, I think. can't see the top 4 being anything other than McD, ShattyDeuce, Smitty and Brady. would be a total joke, otherwise.
 
cheech70 said:
Only one left is Brady
Click to expand...

FultonReed said:
he'll end up playing with Brady a lot, I think. can't see the top 4 being anything other than McD, ShattyDeuce, Smitty and Brady. would be a total joke, otherwise.
Click to expand...

A lot of changes have been made to the roster and the staff, but this is a coach that relies heavily on match-up pairings. He likes to shelter offensive-minded players and/or young players, and roll out veteran pairings for the majority of minutes. If Skjei hasn't earned the trust of the coaches, we could very easily see Skjei and Shattenkirk getting paired while Staal and Holden eat big minutes.

Just gotta hope that there's a fundamental change in philosophy from AV, or that Ruff has a different idea and can execute how he sees fit.
 
I really like variability of Rangers Top4 Ds. I think the pairs will be McDonagh-Shattenkirk, Skjei - Smith but I can see Vigneault changing them during the games depending on the situation. I think McDonagh - Smith may be used to defend the lead late in the games and Skjei-Shatty when Rangers will need to score.
 
Inferno said:
so theyre an average at best offensive team in the playoffs...this is why i think the loss of that Pouliot, brassard, and zucc line was so devastating..and why Hagelins loss is so painful...the rangers just cant play a cycle game...Hagelin and pouliot were amazing at that...keep the puck in the zone, generate offensive chances...sustain pressure..play in their end.

they could ALSO play the speed/rush game as well...ideal players for this idiotic system. Kreider is another. We need to get more players like that...fast, but can play the boards..dont necessarily have to shoot the puck 150MPH to be a good player. Kreider, Stalberg, Zucc, Hagelin, Pouliot, Nash..all guys who can do that....to a lesser extent JT miller is like this as well. But guys like Grabner..not so great on the boards...Hayes..not so great through the zone with speed...theres flaws in how youre putting this together....Lias + Filip seem to be more of the former than the latter, but we'll see i guess.
Click to expand...

I understand what you are saying. There are certain guys that just want the puck more than others and will go fight for it more than others. A very common drill I used to do would have 2 guys line up on the blueline and dump the puck in a corner to see who came out with the puck. Sometimes speed or size would win the battle but other times hunger for that puck would overcome everything else.
 
I wouldn't be surprised if Shatt ends up with Skjei over the long haul. AV is going to lean on Smith, Staal, and Holden in defensive situations, I believe, playing them with McDonagh
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom