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 expecting server maintenance on March 3rd starting at midnight, there may be downtime during the work.
I don’t see why people are overreacting yet. For one, I’m not the biggest Kevin fan, as I didn’t want the Rangers to sign him (I knew he would take time away from ADA and eventually Pionk). However, the season is 3 games old. Do I think Shattenkirk is a top pairing defenseman? No. But he’s an ok top 4 guy with favorable deployment. He always has been. Is it possible that he has regressed like crazy? Yes, but very unlikely. I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, but I would rather have ADA play over him.

It’s too early to be alarmed, although I am just a tad bit concerned.

Besides, how is Shattenkirk not an offensive defenseman? He has a weak shot and isn’t great in transition, but he’s a good playmaking defenseman when in the offensive zone. Problem is, we already have two other playmaking defensemen in ADA and Pionk.
 
Machinehead said:
I see we continue to talk about analytics as if they're pulled from space and didn't happen on the ice. That's productive.
Click to expand...
No, but utilizing solely analytics try to analyze a player is also not very productive. You seem to want to put a narrative that Shattenkirk is a good defender. You are producing metrics to try to prove your point.
 
True Blue said:
No, but utilizing solely analytics try to analyze a player is also not very productive. You seem to want to put a narrative that Shattenkirk is a good defender. You are producing metrics to try to prove your point.
Click to expand...
Yes, I'm using evidence to prove my point. Imagine that.

And instead of responding with your own evidence, you just decide that my evidence doesn't count.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Inferno
Buchnevich89 said:
I don’t see why people are overreacting yet. For one, I’m not the biggest Kevin fan, as I didn’t want the Rangers to sign him (I knew he would take time away from ADA and eventually Pionk). However, the season is 3 games old. Do I think Shattenkirk is a top pairing defenseman? No. But he’s an ok top 4 guy with favorable deployment. He always has been. Is it possible that he has regressed like crazy? Yes, but very unlikely. I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, but I would rather have ADA play over him.

It’s too early to be alarmed, although I am just a tad bit concerned.

Besides, how is Shattenkirk not an offensive defenseman? He has a weak shot and isn’t great in transition, but he’s a good playmaking defenseman when in the offensive zone. Problem is, we already have two other playmaking defensemen in ADA and Pionk.
Click to expand...
See, and I see Pionk as a defense first type of player. Of course Shattenkirk is an offensive defenseman. Most of his career, his minutes have been sheltered. He seems not to be very good at playing defense. This is not a panic, it's just what is.
 
Machinehead said:
Yes, I'm using evidence to prove my point. Imagine that.

And instead of responding with your own evidence, you just decide that my evidence doesn't count.
Click to expand...
This is a discussion that has been raging on these boards for several years now. Metrics vs. eye test. I can scour through the stats, had I had the time. But in this case, my evidence is what I see in front of me. And that is the awful defensive play of an offensive defenseman. You see a solid defender when you are watching these games?
 
True Blue said:
This is a discussion that has been raging on these boards for several years now. Metrics vs. eye test. I can scour through the stats, had I had the time. But in this case, my evidence is what I see in front of me. And that is the awful defensive play of an offensive defenseman. You see a solid defender when you are watching these games?
Click to expand...

I've already said that I see a solid defender who struggles moving the puck, yes.

If you don't see that, then we're just not going to agree.

That's fine, but it's not fair to just mock/dismiss evidence that doesn't agree with your argument.
 
Nuclear take: Redden 2.0

I get we needed help on the PP but our defense was just as bad. We need actual defenders. There's a place for him but the Rangers are just not it right now. I feel similar about EK as well.
 
Maybe Shattenkirk is having issues with the knee and they are trying to use him sparingly? He hasn't looked great but if hes healthy all year he should be better than this
 
Shattenkirk is turning into a disaster of a free-agent signing, even with the home town discount. He's been non-existent for large stretches of the game. He's an ordinary defenseman with some PP advantages if he has time and space. Pionk brings more in both situations at this point.

He hasn't been close to what the Rangers thought they were getting, a consistent 10 G, 30+ A backline PP producer. And lets face, he was never really THAT great of a player to begin with it. Even with that said, his play has been very disappointing. You want to give him a break due to the injury last season? Ok - but how long do you give him? We have all season I guess since its a rebuild, but at some point (20 games I'd say) things are gonna get awfully uncomfortable in the interviews with this dude.

More concerning than his offensive contributions is when a new first-time coach comes in and the first thing he says when asked about him is that they are working with him with his gap control and trying to increase his foot speed AFTER a full summer of working with Ben Prentiss and being in "top shape" - you know there is something inherently wrong with his skillset matching the pace of today's NHL game when things like that are being said out in the open.
 
I'm guessing Quinn is scratching Shatty to light a fire under him.

Shattenkirk needs to be better, that's the bottom line. His D-zone play is whatever, but he needs to perform offensively and on the PP. He's looked like he's never played on a PP before so far this season, out of sync. He needs to get up to speed. Hopefully this lights a fire under him and he can get to the top of his game.
 
Machinehead said:
That's fine, but it's not fair to just mock/dismiss evidence that doesn't agree with your argument.
Click to expand...
One can make stats show whatever is necessary to prove a point. Metrics are far from perfect and can be flawed. He has never been considered a guy you want out there doing "defending". None of his previous teams played him as such. His defensive play so far in NY, for one reason or another, has not shown that his prior teams were incorrect in their assessment. He needs to improve. Right now, the Rangers cannot afford to have him and Staal struggling. If he cannot even bring his defending to the level of average, then maybe he needs to join (when it happens) Staal on the not dressed list.
 
True Blue said:
One can make stats show whatever is necessary to prove a point. Metrics are far from perfect and can be flawed. He has never been considered a guy you want out there doing "defending". None of his previous teams played him as such. His defensive play so far in NY, for one reason or another, has not shown that his prior teams were incorrect in their assessment. He needs to improve. Right now, the Rangers cannot afford to have him and Staal struggling. If he cannot even bring his defending to the level of average, then maybe he needs to join (when it happens) Staal on the not dressed list.
Click to expand...
I didn't "make" the stats do anything. They are what they are.

It's viewings that can be interpreted in whatever way you want. You've got that backwards.

It's completely unfounded that he was sheltered in St. Louis, but that will be ignored like any other evidence.
 
True Blue said:
One can make stats show whatever is necessary to prove a point. Metrics are far from perfect and can be flawed. He has never been considered a guy you want out there doing "defending". None of his previous teams played him as such. His defensive play so far in NY, for one reason or another, has not shown that his prior teams were incorrect in their assessment. He needs to improve. Right now, the Rangers cannot afford to have him and Staal struggling. If he cannot even bring his defending to the level of average, then maybe he needs to join (when it happens) Staal on the not dressed list.
Click to expand...

They don't play him as such because he is good offensively and it is a waste of his talents to give him a defensive role. There are far more players that are good in the defensive zone/bad in the offensive zone than the other way around.

This is the case of almost every defenseman that is good offensively - even one's that you would think are given heavy defensive deployment like Hedman. They almost all are actually given heavy offensive deployment. I've looked this up last year or so and posted all these numbers. Defenseman that can score are generally given a ton of o-zone starts and softer matchups regardless of their defensive reputations. Obviously there are exceptions.

213 dmen played 500+ mins 5v5 last year. Here are players that were in the top 25 percentile of o-zone starts: Kronwall, Keith, Giordano, Jones, McAvoy, Ellis, Karlsson, Skjei, Stralman, Hedman and a bunch of other guys of course but as can be seen there are plenty of guys considered great defensively who are given offensive usage because it is a waste of their talents to use them to play so much defense.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Machinehead
He looked like he declined by the time Washington rented him.

I think it was more he was exposed even while playing behind Carlson instead of Petro but all the same.
 
Machinehead said:
I didn't "make" the stats do anything. They are what they are.

It's viewings that can be interpreted in whatever way you want. You've got that backwards.

It's completely unfounded that he was sheltered in St. Louis, but that will be ignored like any other evidence.
Click to expand...

Stop lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom