Player Discussion Marc Staal: Part II

[True Blue]

Service? He lost his eye getting paid exorbitant sums to play hockey, not parachuting into enemy territory.

Call it what you want, he gave his all to this franchise.

No, no one enjoys watching him play anymore.

 

[McRanger]

Call it what you want, he gave his all to this franchise.

No, no one enjoys watching him play anymore.

Eh it's just calling it what is is: he played hard but also got paid absurdly well to do so.

If he wanted to put the franchise first and do a us a "service" he could have retired when he became a liability on the ice and with the cap. He didn't, so he continues to be awful on the ice and a burden on the cap. I don't begrudge him that decision, because this is business and not charity. But I really don't see any reason to laud him either.

 

[True Blue]

Eh it's just calling it what is is: he played hard but also got paid absurdly well to do so.

If he wanted to put the franchise first and do a us a "service" he could have retired when he became a liability on the ice and with the cap. He didn't, so he continues to be awful on the ice and a burden on the cap. I don't begrudge him that decision, because this is business and not charity. But I really don't see any reason to laud him either.

Everyone can have their own opinions.

The "put the franchise first and retire and walk away from $6m" is a whole different kettle of fish. I am going to guess you know full well where I stand on that.

 

[Chimpradamus]

Disdain for a guy who gave his heart, soul, health and a friggin' eye to a team you root for?

We all know that he is not much more suited than to be a 7th defenseman at this point. But really? This type of vitriol?

Every player gives his heart, soul and health to play. Not everyone are dumb enough to play without a visor though. That's entirely on him to lose an eye. By his own words, he was stupid to not play with a visor, so there's that. Don't play this into some kind of martyrdom.

It's like a fan of a race driver saying it's courageous to drive without a seat belt.

Staal has been a disaster for half a decade now. Somehow, he still remains on the team. It's incredible. I'm not saying this because I dislike Staal, no, I have nothing against him as a person. I'm talking about his performance, which has been terrible, for a long time. He heavily declined 8 years ago or so.

It was basically a dice roll if he or Girardi would've been bought out. They were both terrible. Staal was lucky. He also should've retired by now, by 5 years. The same with Girardi. Both handled the puck like a live hand grenade, both couldn't skate, they were the opposite of a modern, successful defenseman.

I just find it extremely ironic Lundqvist will be bought out before Staal. Lundqvist is still a NHL goalie. Staal is not a NHL defenseman and hasn't been for a long time now.

 

[May Rih]

@Blue Blooded posted it in the DeAngelo thread but I think it applies for this one as well.

#dump18.

Let me preface this to be safe: I don't think Staal is good.

Having said that, I DO think that Staal is an excellent partner for Tony - in principle. His game is essentially built to support Tony and nothing else, by maximizing the time he can play to his strengths, and minimize the time spent around his weaknesses.

- Staal's job is to be first one into the corner on a dump - potentially Tony's biggest weaknesses. It's not a strength anymore since he only has one eye, but in a past life it was, and you can tell he's at least comfortable doing it and allows Tony to not have to.

- Tony's biggest strength is when the pucks on his stick - when Staal gets it, he's moving it d to d. On the blueline in the O-zone, regroup in the neutral zone, or breakout in the d-zone - his first look is always to Tony.

Again, I don't think Staal is good. And if you could replace him with someone else who does these exact same things, but also isn't bad, that would obviously be a huge plus over the present situation. However, I do feel there's a solid point to be made that Staal actually does provide some positive value to Tony, by being partner that basically exists only to cater to his strengths and mask his weaknesses.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Let me preface this to be safe: I don't think Staal is good.

Having said that, I DO think that Staal is an excellent partner for Tony - in principle. His game is essentially built to support Tony and nothing else, by maximizing the time he can play to his strengths, and minimize the time spent around his weaknesses.

- Staal's job is to be first one into the corner on a dump - potentially Tony's biggest weaknesses. It's not a strength anymore since he only has one eye, but in a past life it was, and you can tell he's at least comfortable doing it and allows Tony to not have to.

- Tony's biggest strength is when the pucks on his stick - when Staal gets it, he's moving it d to d. On the blueline in the O-zone, regroup in the neutral zone, or breakout in the d-zone - his first look is always to Tony.

Again, I don't think Staal is good. And if you could replace him with someone else who does these exact same things, but also isn't bad, that would obviously be a huge plus over the present situation. However, I do feel there's a solid point to be made that Staal actually does provide some positive value to Tony, by being partner that basically exists only to cater to his strengths and mask his weaknesses.

I would agree to this, in theory.

But the problem is, and you said it yourself, playing the puck on dump ins is no longer a strength of Staals. When teams choose to attack the two of them like this, you'll notice that the puck is almost always dumped into Staal's corner. Hes a sitting duck for these plays because hes usually too slow to get there with out any pressure (or just flat out gets beat there) and in the event that he actually beats people to the puck, he's liable to turn it over.

Tony's strengths are excelling in transition and generating offense. Staal hurts both of those things massively. He isn't catering to anything or masking anything, he legitimately makes him (and everyone else on the ice) worse by playing. Numbers dont lie, but the eye test backs them up.

 

[May Rih]

I would agree to this, in theory.

But the problem is, and you said it yourself, playing the puck on dump ins is no longer a strength of Staals. When teams choose to attack the two of them like this, you'll notice that the puck is almost always dumped into Staal's corner. Hes a sitting duck for these plays because hes usually too slow to get there with out any pressure (or just flat out gets beat there) and in the event that he actually beats people to the puck, he's liable to turn it over.

Tony's strengths are excelling in transition and generating offense. Staal hurts both of those things massively. He isn't catering to anything or masking anything, he legitimately makes him (and everyone else on the ice) worse by playing. Numbers dont lie, but the eye test backs them up.

Yeah I agree...its more in principle than anything else. I will definitely not argue what the numbers show - I don't think he's good, and replacing him with someone else is obviously a better alternative. I was just trying to demonstrate that there is SOME value he brings to the partnership based on his exclusively supplemental role to Tony.

My counterpoints are to the bolded:

- I don't think its almost always dumped into Staal's corner - I think its actually that Staal almost always goes to retrieve the puck, regardless of the corner. Which was the original point I was trying to make on it being Tony's weakness that Staal covered for. I'll try and keep an eye on it though for the next few games to see if this is true or not.

- My point isn't that he's not killing the transition game and generation of offense (he is). My point was more that he's at least working to maximize the time the puck is spent on ADA's stick, which is a very important trait for Tony's d partner to have. And as I type this, I'm realizing it's kind of a terrible argument to make...so I guess really what I'm saying is it could be worse? Like, he could be Staal, but then ALSO try and be a puck mover?

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

More hogwash. Go Away Staal.

" Since returning to the lineup Dec. 6 following ankle surgery, Staal has been on the ice for 16 goals against in 456:40 of five-on-five hockey. Only nine defensemen in the NHL have played at least 450 minutes of five-on-five in that time frame and have been on for fewer goals against than the 33-year-old" (naturalstattrick.com).

He's been playing well, and winning battles.

Replying to this here since it doesn't really belong in the Fox thread.

Since January 31st (first game back from the ASB), Staal has the WORST goals against per 60 of ANY regular D five on five (9 goals against.)

Trouba is the only one who has been on ice for more (10), but hes also played 70+ minutes more than Staal in that time frame (DeAngelo, Staal's partner has been on ice for 6.)

This is problematic for the sole reason that he has been deployed as a 6th defenseman for a while, the team has played great hockey since then but when hes on the ice, bad things are happening. He's been on ice for 50(!) High Danger chances against. Tied with Fox for the most since Jan 31, but Fox leads all Ranger D in TOI in that time frame (252 vs 179 for Staal)

Uncle Larry was kind of sneaky with that tidbit.

 

[duhmetreE]

AND THEN THERE WAS ONE.....

ONE LOSER STILL REMAINING

 

[ohbaby]

Replying to this here since it doesn't really belong in the Fox thread.

Since January 31st (first game back from the ASB), Staal has the WORST goals against per 60 of ANY regular D five on five (9 goals against.)

Trouba is the only one who has been on ice for more (10), but hes also played 70+ minutes more than Staal in that time frame (DeAngelo, Staal's partner has been on ice for 6.)

This is problematic for the sole reason that he has been deployed as a 6th defenseman for a while, the team has played great hockey since then but when hes on the ice, bad things are happening. He's been on ice for 50(!) High Danger chances against. Tied with Fox for the most since Jan 31, but Fox leads all Ranger D in TOI in that time frame (252 vs 179 for Staal)

Uncle Larry was kind of sneaky with that tidbit.

First off it wasn't Larry's info. naturalstattrick.com

Second, naturalstattrick.com stats is a much bigger sample. Making it much more meaningful than the 14 game sample you are using. Maybe you didn't understand naturalstattrick.com stats.

Out of at least 120 D-men in this league, since Dec 6th, Staal has been on the ice for less goals than a 111 of them in 5 on 5 play. Not bad for a 33 yr old.

With a sample size this large, you really can't chalk it up to luck.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

First off it wasn't Larry's info. naturalstattrick.com

Second, naturalstattrick.com stats is a much bigger sample. Making it much more meaningful than the 14 game sample you are using.

Larry pulled it from NST (Which is where I got mine as well) and set the information in a way which it would make Staal look good.

The 14 game sample I used was based off of someone else's comments that Staal has been good since the ASB. That is objectively false, hes been horrible.

The 20 games before it, Staal had the 2nd highest High Danger chance against per Minute of all Ranger Defenders (behind Skjei) but was on ice for a team low 8 goals against.

Goalies had a .953 save percentage when Staal was on the ice. If you're giving up high danger chances at the 2nd highest clip of all defensemen and your goalie stands on his head when you're on the ice, that doesn't mean you're playing well, it means you're lucky.

Also those things don't hold up in the long run, which is why you've seen it catch up to him since the ASB.

This is a really strange hill that you've chosen to die on.

 

[ohbaby]

and set the information in a way which it would make Staal look good.

How could it not make Staal look good? 9th best out of at least a 120 D-men in this league? Are you kidding me? Could be even more D-men than that. I only used the two top pairs of each team.

If he was as bad as you say after the ASB, there's no way he would be 9th best since Dec 6th. Your sample is almost half of what naturalstattrick.com used. Sorry. Your skewing stats again. You're probably counting PK goals in your conclusions which is deceiving and misleading.

And as far as dying on this hill, I am glad to show what Marc Staal has meant to this team and how he is still fairly useful. He will be gone soon, no need to kick him out the door. It's really pathetic and beneath any Rangers fan.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

How could it not make Staal look good? 9th best out of at least a 120 D-men in this league? Are you kidding me? Could be even more D-men than that. I only used the two top pairs of each team.

If he was as bad as you say after the ASB, there's no way he would be 9th best since Dec 6th. Your sample is almost half of what naturalstattrick.com used. Sorry. Your skewing stats again. You're probably counting PK goals in your conclusions which is deceiving and misleading.

And as far as dying on this hill, I am glad to show what Marc Staal has meant to this team and how he is still fairly useful. He will be gone soon, no need to kick him out the door. It's really pathetic and beneath any Rangers fan.

The Since the ASB numbers are 5v5

I may be many things, but deceiving and misleading are not those things.

also, my sample is PART OF WHAT WAS PULLED FROM NATURAL STAT TRICK FOR LARRY'S PARAMETERS.

If you...

- Give up a high volume of High Danger chances against (2nd on the team per 60 amongst D between December 6th and January 30. Hes 1st by a long shot since Jan 30th.)
- Have an on ice save percentage of .953...

You aren't skilled in keeping pucks out of your net, you are lucky. Unless your goalie continues to stand on his head, you will NOT be able to sustain that, as reflected above.

This is where you and I differ. You can appreciate what he's done and who he is as a person, but we shouldn't be carrying (and using) a player who obviously cannot perform at this level anymore (in any capacity.) Gone soon isn't enough, he should have been gone yesterday.

 

[GoAwayGiannone]

When arguing about whether or not Staal sucks against someone who's username is GoAwayStaal and his tag says Staal sucks you better come correct lol.

 

[KirkAlbuquerque]

Every player gives his heart, soul and health to play. Not everyone are dumb enough to play without a visor though. That's entirely on him to lose an eye. By his own words, he was stupid to not play with a visor, so there's that. Don't play this into some kind of martyrdom.

It's like a fan of a race driver saying it's courageous to drive without a seat belt.

Staal has been a disaster for half a decade now. Somehow, he still remains on the team. It's incredible. I'm not saying this because I dislike Staal, no, I have nothing against him as a person. I'm talking about his performance, which has been terrible, for a long time. He heavily declined 8 years ago or so.

It was basically a dice roll if he or Girardi would've been bought out. They were both terrible. Staal was lucky. He also should've retired by now, by 5 years. The same with Girardi. Both handled the puck like a live hand grenade, both couldn't skate, they were the opposite of a modern, successful defenseman.

I just find it extremely ironic Lundqvist will be bought out before Staal. Lundqvist is still a NHL goalie. Staal is not a NHL defenseman and hasn't been for a long time now.

Because we have two young and good alternatives to Hank on the roster. We have nobody to who can step in for Staal ( or Smith) on the left side .

 

[kovazub94]

Because we have two young and good alternatives to Hank on the roster. We have nobody to who can step in for Staal ( or Smith) on the left side .

Doesn't make it less ironic that a guy with Staal's injuries and concussions is going to be the last man standing.

 

[KirkAlbuquerque]

Doesn't make it less ironic that a guy with Staal's injuries and concussions is going to be the last man standing.

yeah its very unfortunate. Especially since Hank is still an above average NHL goalie and might be forced to retire or get bought out which is a travesty

 

[RangersFan1994]

Fun fact: by the end of this season Staal will likely have more Ranger games on his record than Lundqvist.

Most games played

• Harry Howell – 1160.
• Brian Leetch – 1129.
• Rod Gilbert – 1065.
• Ron Greschner – 981.
• Walt Tkaczuk – 945.
• Henrik Lundqvist - 885.
• Marc Staal – 884.
• Jean Ratelle – 861.

it is very close

 

[kovazub94]

yeah its very unfortunate. Especially since Hank is still an above average NHL goalie and might be forced to retire or get bought out which is a travesty

Not unfortunate or, especially, travesty. Life moves on. As you noted as Hank is still an above average goalie the current situation is because the Rangers objectively have two goalies who are better than him already at the moment. IMO it would be a travesty if the Rangers were forced to move Henrik specifically because of cap considerations without an adequate replacement already in place.

Brodeur, Luongo were moved and now Hank is on deck too.

 

[will1066]

Most games played

• Harry Howell – 1160.
• Brian Leetch – 1129.
• Rod Gilbert – 1065.
• Ron Greschner – 981.
• Walt Tkaczuk – 945.
• Henrik Lundqvist - 885.
• Marc Staal – 884.
• Jean Ratelle – 861.

it is very close

Since Hank is unofficially the backup now, Staal will surpass him unless he gets hurt. Hajek had one job...

 

[JohnC]

I’d imagine there’s a more than compelling case that Staal has been easily replaceable internally for at least 5 years now.

 

[NYRangers0723]

I like Staal. Before all the injuries he was a hell of a defensemen. It’s very unfortunate those injuries basically derailed his career. I still don’t know what Sather was thinking giving him that long of a deal after suffering the concussion/eye injury and breaking down rapidly at that point already

 

[offdacrossbar]

staal has many holes in his game. hes slow. he does things slowly. he doesnt handle to the puck well. his ability to play against top forwards is nil. hes exposed badly against speed. he is a difficult partner to play with. he doest possess the puck. he backs in way too much surrendering too much ice. he isnt good.

having said that, there is NO ONE ready to step in and play right now. the fact that we need brendan smith to step into bradys minutes tells you exactly that. were stuck.

quinn continues to glorify staal as an important part of the defense. hes old. hes a vet. hes been around. thats about all the positives there are. with brady gone, staal is all we got.

the thought of another season of marc staal next year is terrifying.

 

[Guyute]

Keep Staal and Smith through next year. No buyouts. Force the young LHDs to earn their spot on in the lineup. No freebees (looking at you, Brett Howden).

 

[RangersFan1994]

I like Staal. Before all the injuries he was a hell of a defensemen. It’s very unfortunate those injuries basically derailed his career. I still don’t know what Sather was thinking giving him that long of a deal after suffering the concussion/eye injury and breaking down rapidly at that point already

imagine if Staal is the alltime top 3 Rangers in games played. it would be scary if he can achieve that. ugh I can't wait until he is gone.